MA S TER 

NEGA  TIVE 

NO.  92-80599 


MICROFILMED  1992 
COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES/NEW  YORK 


as  part  of  the 
'Foundations  of  Western  Civilization  Preservation  Project" 


Funded  by  the 
NATIONAL  ENDOWMENT  FOR  THE  HUMANITIES 


Reproductions  may  not  be  made  without  permission  from 

Columbia  University  Library 


COPYRIGHT  STATEMENT 

The  copyright  law  of  the  United  States  -  Title  17,  United 
States  Code  -  concerns  the  making  of  photocopies  or  other 
reproductions  of  copyrighted  material... 

Columbia  University  Library  reserves  the  right  to  refuse  to 
accept  a  copy  order  if,  in  its  judgement,  fulfillment  of  the  order 
would  mvolve  violation  of  the  copyright  law. 


AUTHOR: 


RADFORD,  ROBERT  S. 


TITLE: 


LATIN  MONOSYLLABLES 


PLACE: 

[S.L.] 

DA  TE : 

[1 9031 


*.» 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES 
PRESERVATION  DEPARTMENT 

BIBLIOCRAPHIC  MICRnFORM  TARHFT 


Master  Negative  ff 


Original  Malerial  a$  Filmed  -  Existing  Bibliographic  Record 


Restrictions  on  Use: 


BKS/PROO   Books        FIJL/BIB    NyCG92-B320  J.  B 
Record  t  of  O  -  Record  added  today 


IDsMYCG'92-B320^18 
C  C :  9,6  6  8   E«'L  T  ;•  a  m 
CF-*5:xx       L:eng 

PB 2  1903/ 


TYP:a  STsp 

DCFg?    CBC;?  MOD? 

INTi?    GPC:?  BIO:? 

REPs?  CFI  ,-? 


DM: 


040 
100  1 


OR  2     POL: 

R  a  cJ  f  o  r  d  ,  R  o  b  e  r  t  S  o  iri  e  r  v  i  1 1  e 


RR: 


Ai 

rqu I s i  !.: i oijs               NYCG-PT 

FRM: 

MS; 

:          E:Ls                AD:  05-07-92 

Sl^m'i 

ATC:                     IJD:  05-07-92 

F I C  :  ? 

COMy??? 

FSI  5? 

ILC;??-;^'?          Us? 

COL : 

EriL:;                  GEN:          B5E: 

245  14   The  Latin  MonosyllaW.eB  in  their  Relation  to  Accent  T^nd    Quanti  ty=  I  hEmi 


^  /••  n 


rofCirm3.=  I  bA    Study    in    the    Verse    of    Terence 
Cs.i . .,  «  I  bs  .n  ,  ,  ^f  I  cl  9033  . 

C6a;i-.ia3  p. 

LDB  GRIG 

QD  05-07-92 


TECHNICAL  MICROFORM  DATA 


fx^h^^n  o/?^-^-^-'^-~7-V-                    REDUCTION     RATIO:         (  /  K 
IMAGE  PLACEMENT:    lA   ^IA)    IB     IIB  — 

DATE     FILMED:___6_-_l£Jl INITIALS 1\a    OX- 

FILMED  BY:    RESEARCH  PUBLICATIONS.  INC  WOODDRIDGe7ct 


c 


Association  for  Information  and  image  IManagement 

1100  Wayne  Avenue.  Suite  1100 
Silver  Spring,  Maryland  20910 

301/587-8202 


Centimeter 

1         2        3 


iiU 


iiiilmiiiiii 


Inches 


Mil 


TTT 


5 


Ml 


6 

iJiiiili 


7        8        9       10 

ilmi|i||i|iiiiliiiiliiiiliiiilii 


I  TTTT 


11       12      13 

iiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiii 


1.0 

Ui      28. 

It  ^ 

1.4 

2.5 
2.2 

2.0 
1.8 

1.6 

I.I 

1.25 

TTT 


14       15    mm 

iiliiiiliiiil 


T 


MflNUFfiCTURED   TO  RUM  STRNDPRDS 
BY  APPLIED  IMfiGE,    INC. 


ExtraUed  from  the  Transactions  of  the  American  Philological 

Association^  Vol.  xxxiv,  1903. 


^KA  /cl^xn. 


VL  —  The  Latin  Monosyllables  in  their  Relation  to  Aceent 
and  Quantity.     A  Study  in  the  Verse  of  Terence} 

By  Pkof.   ROBERT  S.   RADFORD, 

ELMlKvV   COLLEC.E. 

I.   Problem  and  Method. 

It  is  the  purpose  of  this  paper  to  investigate  the  cause  of 
the  syllable-shortening  which  occurs  after  short  monosyllables 
in  early  Latin  verse,  and  also  in  a  more  genenil  way  the  j)art 
which  monosyllabic  words  play  in   the  accentuation  of  the 
Latin  sentence.     The  data  illustrating  the  quantitative  and 
accentual    relations   of   monosyllabic    words   will   be   drawn 
almost  entirely  from  the  six  plays  of  Terence,  although  simi- 
lar results  have  been  obtained  by  the  writer  from  an  exami- 
nation of  ten  of  the  plays  of  Plautus.      In  a  study  which 
involves  the  Latin  sentence-accentuation  it  is  scarcelv  neces- 
sary to  state  that  the  writer  is  greatly  indebted  to  the  brilliant 
labors  in  this  field  of  Ritschl,^  Klotz,  Lindsay,- Skutsch,Wack. 
ernagel,  and  many  others,  not  to  mention  the  detailed  inves- 
tigations  of   Ahlberg,    Podiaski,  Kiimpf,   and  O.   Brugman. 
Special   indebtedness    will   be   acknowledged    in    each   case, 
but  it  will  be  readily  understood  that  my  total  indebtedness 
to  these   scholars  is  greater  than  can  be  indicated  in  single 
references. 

The  two  most  frequent  forms  of  syllable-shortening  in  early 
Latin  occur  in  iambic  words  and  in  words  preceded  by  a  short 
monosyllable.     In  the  case  of  iambic  words  the  shortenino-  is 

1  A  paper  treating  the  same  sul)ject  in  relation  to  the  verse  of  Plautus  was  read 
by  the  writer  before  the  Johns  Hopkins  Philological  Association,  Ai)ril  24,  1903. 
An  abstract  of  this  paper  has  already  been  published  in  the  Johns  Hopkins  Uni- 
versity Circulars,  Vol.  XXIII,  and  the  paper  will  appear  in  full  in  an  early  number 
of  the  American  Journal  of  Philology. 

2  I  think  it  proper,  however,  to  state  that  at  the  time  when  I  reached  the  main 
conclusions  of  this  article  1  was  not  acquainted  with  that  part  of  Ritschl's  Prole- 
gomena which  treats  the  same  subject,  nor  with  Wackernagel's  article  in  Imlogcrm. 
Porsch.^  Vol.  I. 


Y«il.  xJixiv.J 


Lmtin  M&nosjiiabies, 


now  very  generally  attributed  to  the  word-accent  upon  the 
initial  syllable;  a  slight  modification  of  this  view  would  be  to 
hold  that  tbc  shortening  is  due  to  the  analogy  of  pyrrhic 
wo^rdi.  s«cli,  as  rtw  and  mgii,  m  which  the  quantitative  rela- 
tions do  not  retard  the  development  of  a  clear  stress  accent. 
A  second  and  still  larger  class  of  shortened  quantities  arises 
when  a  short  monosyllable,  or  dissyllable  which  has  become 
a  iiionosyllahle  by  elision,  precedes  another  word,  as  sed  abstu- 
Msii,  sed  niyr/i/i.  What  is  the  cause  of  this  shortening  ? 
Why  is  it  that  the  short  monosyllable  has  the  power  of  short- 
ening a  following  long  syllable?  Upon  this  question  students 
of  early  Latin  verse  are  far,  I  think,  from  having  reached  an 
agreement  It  happens,  necessarily,  from  the  very  structure 
of  iambic  verse,  that  a  long  syllable  shortened  in  an  iambic 
sequence  is  in  every  case  either  preceded  or  followed  by  the 
verse-accent ;  upon  this  coincidence  rests  the  older  view,  still 
held  by  Seyffert,  Leo,  and  Brix-Niemeyer,  of  an  artificial^ 
shortening  produced  by  the  verse-accent.  Accentual  scholars 
are  themselves  greatly  divided  in  opinion  at  this  point,  and  it 
does  not  seem  necessary  to  mention  all  the  theories  which 
hme  licen  proposed,  that  of  Klotz  being  especial!)-  difficult 
nf  acceptance,  at  least  in  the  extreme  form  in  which  it  is 
stated^  Gnmdzii^f,  p.  6^  ff.,  p.  45  ff.  Ahlberg  ( Dc  corn  ft. 
iamb.  PimtL  fmaesiimes,  Lund,  1901,  p.  52  If.),  and  Lindsay 
{Tif  Cafiipi,  London,  19CX),  p.  35*),  have,  it  is  true,  clearly 
pttt  forward  the  view  that  some  form  of  word-grouping  has 
taken  place,  and  that  the  group-accent  has  in  some  way  come 

*  Tlic  use  of  tills  term  must  not  be  imderstood  as  implying  that  I  cjuestion  in 
anapaestic  verse  or  eveii  occasionally  in  the  beginning  of  a  verse  or  colon  of 
iaiiiMc  or  trocliaic  verse  the  occnrrence  of  an  **  acltticiiil  "  or  metrical  shortening 
pn»(luced  by  the  very  concrete,  the  very  real  verse-accent.  If  the  cases  of  sed- 
iiittm,  sed-llhim  were  only  a  few  in  number,  I  should  be  ready  to  accept  the 
metrical  exi»lanation,  to  which  1  have  no  the«>relical  objections.  But  since  these 
cast  s  nre  very  numerous,  and  since  we  know  from  many  ancient  testimonies  that 
it  is  the  special  characteristic  ©f  Latin  iaiibic  verse  to  reproduce  the  carlence  of 
collocjuial  speech,  and  thus  tO  bfjlg  tlie  verse-accent  (as  a  sul»ordinate  factor) 
into  cooperation  with  the  word-accent,  the  uietrkal  eiplanation  appears  to  me 
untenable  for  iaml)ic  verse  as  t  whole* 

-  Ill  his  earlier  writings  (e^,  L&i,  Ijimg.tf.  202),  Professor  Lindsay  hesitated 
betweea  tlii»  liew  «ii4  the  explanalion  given  by  Kloti,  Crundz^  p.  68  ff. 


62 


Robert  S.  Radford. 


[1903 


into  play,  but  neither  of  these  scholars  has  undertaken  to 
explain  how  the  primary  or  secondary  accent  has  come  to 
rest  upon  the  atonic  monosyllable  in  a  group  like  sed  ilU\  sed 
dbstullstL  So  far  as  regards  the  word-grouping,  Havet  also 
long  ago  pointed  out  that  sed-abstiilisti  forms  to  a  certain 
extent  *  one  body '  (see  the  quotation  of  his  views  in  Plessis, 
ed.  AdelpJioe^  p.  5),  and  in  his  Mctriquc  {e.g.  §§  353,  363)  he 
regularly  links  the  monosyllables  by  a  hyphen  with  the  follow- 
ing word  to  indicate  their  proclitic  character,  but  the  particu- 
lar explanation  which  he  gives  of  the  shortening  in  this  group 
is  so  intimately  connected  with  his  theory  of  *  initial  intensity ' 
that  it  does  not  call  for  further  notice  here ;  on  the  theory  of 
*  initial  intensity  *  I  shall  make  some  observations  in  a  later 
section  of  this  article  (see  p.  95,  below). 

I  wish  to  bring  forward  for  the  solution  of  this  problem  a 
method  which  as  a  whole  has  been  hitherto  untried.  I  pro- 
pose in  brief  that  for  the  moiiient  we  shall  wholly  dismiss  the 
question  of  syllable  shortening,  shall  observe  the  short  mono- 
syllables when  they  precede  not  long  but  short  initial  sylla- 
bles, and  determine  independently  the  place  of  both  the 
primary  and  the  secondary  grammatical  accent  in  the  groups 
thus  formed.  This  means  that  we  shall  first  determine  the 
place  of  the  primary  accent  in  the  groups  sed  Jiic  (dissyllabic 
group),  sed  agit  (trisyllabic  group),  sed  Jiomines  (quadrisyl- 
lable group),  and  the  place  of  the  secondary  accent  in  the 
similar  groups  sed  amove,  sed  amavernnty  sed  Jiilaritudo.  It 
is  not  possible,  to  be  sure,  to  determine  directly  the  place  of 
the  accent  in  all  these  groups,  nor  is  it  necessary.  A  single 
group,  the  trisyllabic,  offers  exceptional  opportunities  for  the 
determination  of  its  accent,  and  affords  the  one  point  where 
an  accent-law  may  be  established,  capable  of  extension  in 
principle  to  all  the  groups. 

A  trisyllabic  group  of  this  type  (w.  w^)  may  assume  two 
forms;  it  may  either  form  an  anapaest,  sedagiuit,  or  a  tribrach, 
sed  agit*  Now  from  the  first  of  these  forms,  the  anapaestic, 
we  can  derive  no  aid;  for,  owing  to  the  structure  of  iambic 
verse,  the  group  can  never  occur  without  receiving  the  verse- 
accent  either  upon  the  initial  syllable,  sM  agnnt  (much  the 


W  ijl'  •     Ji' JUtl  IT  m   I' 


Laiin  Motwsyllables, 


63 


J 


iiiore  frequent  form),  or  upon  the  ultimate  sed  agthit  (less 
frequent  form).     Hence  in  this  case  we  can  draw  no  conclu- 

S011S  as  10  the  natural  accent. 

But  liitli  tie  second  form  of  the  trisyllabic  group,  viz.,  the 
tribrach  form,  sed  agit^  the  case  is  wholly  different ;  for  so 
far  as  concerns  the  structure  of  iambic  verse,  the  group  is 
perfectly  icxible  and  may  receive  the  ictus  equally  well  and 
with  nearly  equal  frequency  either  upon  the  initial  syllable, 
Sid  agii,  or  upon  the  second  syllable,  sed  dgit.  So  far,  how- 
ever, as  concerns  the  word-grouping,  the  group  must  not 
admit  the  ictus  upon  the  second  syllable,  if  in  consequence 
of  peculiarly  close  grouping  it  has  acquired  the  grammatical 
accent  of  a  single  tribrach  word,  i.e.  the  grammatical  accent, 
sM  agiif  belonging  to  an  improvised  compound  (as  we  may 
say)^  just  as  the  accent  ineo  belongs  to  a  permanent  com- 
pound. For  it  is  a  well-known  rule  of  Latin  iambic  verse 
that  a  tribrach  word  receives  the  metrical  accent  in  general 
only  upon  the  initial  syllable  and  thus  almost  always  in  agree- 
ment with  the  grammatical  accent,  i.e.  regularly  geuere,  very 
imtljgenire. 

Before  we  proceed  to  apply  the  test  just  indicated  to  the 
verse  of  Terence,  it  will  be  necessary  to  comment  briefly 
Upon  the  general  character  of  the  Latin  monosyllables. 
Accoitiing  to  an  of^repeated  rule  of  the  grammarians  the 
monosyllables  are  usually  without  the  accent.^  Thus  Priscian 
(Kcil,  G.L.  Ill,  p.  479,  20=5  Scholl,  De  acccntu  linguae  lat.^ 
p.  194)  in  speaking  of  the  accent  of  iam  (in  iam  dudum) 
says :  Gravcm.,  ul  omnia  fere  monosyllaba  praepositiva ;  see 
also  I'M/.,  B.  478,  21  (accent  of  n/);  p.  24,  21,  etc.  This  rule 
does  «ot  apply  of  course  to  „,o„osynabic  nouns  and  verbs,  as 
many  other  testimonies  of  the  grammarians  show  (cf.  Scholl, 
i2rii«¥.,  p.  loSf.Xbiit  only  to  those  words  which,  owing  to 
their  meaning,  are  naturally  unaccented  in  many  languages, 
vii.,  the  monosyllabic  prepositions,  conjunctions,  pronouns, 
and  adverbs  (see,  #.^.,  Wallin,  Yale  Psjclwl.  Lab.  SittdieSy 
IX p  lit;  Meycr^Luhke,  G rammed,  mmmn,  Spr.,  I,  p.  503; 

^  I*  llilkr  reaches  the  same  conclusion  on  metrical  grounds,  Res  Metrica\ 


64 


Robert  S.  Radford. 


[1903 


G.  Paris,  Role  de  V accent  lat.,  p.  19).  Hence  there  seems  no 
good  reason  for  doubting  the  substantial  truth  of  the  gram- 
marians' rule,  which  means  no  more  than  the  similar  rule 
respecting  the  accent  of  prepositions,  i.e.  the  prepositions  — 
hoih  praepositiones  compos itae  and  adpositac  —  are  unaccented 
in  a  considerable  majority  of  the  cases  in  which  they  occur, 
as  confero,  conferre^  im  navem,  ex  bello.  Besides,  as  will  be 
shown  later,  the  grammarians  often  distinctly  recognize  that 
the  monosyllables  may  acquire  an  accent  when  they  form 
part  of  a  compositum  or  word-group.  Thus  it  is  evident  from 
the  grammarians*  statements  that  the  monosyllabic  conjunc- 
tions, pronouns,  and  adverbs  bear  precisely  the  same  relation 
to  the  accent  as  the  monosyllabic  prepositions.  This  con- 
clusion is  expressly  confirmed  by  Audax  (Keil,  VII,  p.  360, 
I  £f.*),  to  whom  we  owe  the  clearest  account  of  the  accent  of 
these  particles  that  is  to  be  found  in  Latin  literature  subse- 
quent to  Quintilian  :  non  omnes  partes  orationis  aequales 
sunt  .  .  .  nam  et  pronomen  subiacet  noniini,  et  verbo  servit 
adverbium  .  coniunctio  quoque  et  praepositio  ad  clientelam 
maiorum  partium  pertinent .  hae  ergo  partes,  quae  adpendices 
sunt,  sic  maioribus  copulantur,  iit  tanqitain  in  iinam  partem 
orationis'^  coalescant,  proprium  vero  fastigium  perdant,  non 
omnes  dumtaxat,  sed  pleraeque. 

It  is  necessary  also  to  review  briefly  the  treatment  in  iambic 
verse  both  of  primary  and  of  secondary  word-accents  belong- 
ing to  the  syllable-group,  ^  ^  w  : 

A.  Primary  Accentuation.  —To  determine  with  precision 
the  place  of  the  primary  grammatical  accent  in  trisyllabic 
groups  of  the  form  vy,  w  w  is  possible  only  through  the  fact 
that  tribrach  words  such  as  gencrc  do  not  as  a  rule  admit  the 
metrical  accent  upon  the  second  syllable.  Yet  the  statement 
sometimes  made  that  Latin  tribrach  words  never  under  any 
conditions   admit  the   accent  genire  in   iambic  verse  is   not 

*  This  is  substantially  the  same  as  the  anonymous  quotation  in  Scholl,  De 
aec.y  p.  175  f.,  entitled  «  Interr.  et  resp."  which,  however,  is  not  placed,  as  might 
be  expected,  in  the  chapter  on  the  accent  of  conjunctions. 

2  •  Una  pars  orationis '  is  the  special  term  which  the  grammarians  employ  of 
the  compositUy  which,  like  htiittsce  modi,  istius  uiotH,  etc.,  are  known  to  be  such 
through  the  test  of  the  accentuation;   cf.  Scholl,  De  ace,  p.  124  ff. 


Vol.  jcxxiv.] 


Latin  Mt^nosj^ilabies, 


65 


66 


Robert  S.  Radford. 


[»903 


altogether  accurate,  so  far  at  least  as  regards  the  first  foot 

of  a  ¥crse  or  colon. ;  and  since  we  can  scarcely  expect  that 
tribrach  groups  shall  be  treated  more  rigorously  in  this  respect 
than  tribrach  words,  it  is  important  to  state  the  usage  of  the 
iambic  poets  in  respect  to  the  first  foot  somewhat  more  fully 
than  is  done  by  Klotz,  Gmuds.,  p.  274  ff.,  or  by  Kitsch  1, 
Froieg.,  p.,  ccxxv  If,  The  evidence  is  conclusive  that  the 
Roman  poets  have  sometimes  admitted  in  tribrach  words  and 
in  words  ending  in  a  tribrach  the  accentuation  £-efi/re  in  the 
first  foot  of  a  verse  or  colon,  although  far  more  rarely  and 
with  much  greater  hesitation  than  they  have  admitted  the 
accentuation  /feffore  in  the  same  place.  The  usage  of  the  later 
poets  may  be  found  in  L.  Miiller,  AVj  i/r/r.,  p.  168:  Seneca 
and  Prudcntius  have  each  one  such  accentuation  of  the  tri- 
brach in  the  first  foot  {/i}gimm,  g-m/re),  not  to  mention  the 
more  frequent  cases  in  less  careful  writers  such  as  Ausonius, 
Avienus,  Terentianus,  etc.  From  the  Christian  poets  also 
some  examples  have  been  collected  by  Hiimer,  Latdmisih' 
Ckrisiiickefi  Rkjtkmefi,  p.  27.  Examples  from  the  metrical 
inscriptions  are  given  by  llodgman,  Hartfard  Studies,  IX, 
p.  139,  i^.  CLE,  67,  3  iidqite  ;  92,  3  Siephdne  ;  211,  3  iiimla. 

Ahlberg  {De  fr^ceieusmaiieis  aMtiqume  fmsis  iat,,  Lund,  1900, 
I,  p.  32)  accepts  the  accentuations  sequiminei  Merc.  782, 

muiiifis  (first  foot  of  second  colon)  J/<;a/.  169,  Mincrua,  Baech. 

893.  Hence,  even  in  cases  where  a  correction  would  involve 
little  textual  change,  it  appears  unnecessary  to  follow  Langen 
{Phihfogus^  XXXI,  p.  109),  and  recent  editors  in  emending 
MiL  1 1 20' ililiif  (Gotz and  LeO' :  itmn\  Andt\  478  Mcine{\]n\^i.: 
kk  mparatiim\  Caecil.  emm.  frgm.  232  egone  (retained  by 
Ribbeck^),  or  to  adopt  with  Scholl  a  change  of  order  in  Cas. 
564:  komhiim  amatorem  (cf.  Humphreys,  Trans.  Am.  Phil. 
Assoc.  ¥H  (li76)i  p.  132  t)}'  Examples  in  other  feet  than 
the  irstt  however,  are  so  rare  in  the  republican  and  early 
imperial  poetry  that  they  must  be  regarded  with  extreme  sus- 
picion and  are  commonly  removed  from  the  text  by  transpo- 

*  Aid  tlio  lli-iiftf,  Mimi.  507;  i^ntf  Cure.  119  (in  cretic  verse;  Gotz,  igon)\ 

I 

ri^rinM,  Ace.  tr«g,frgfn.  381. 


I 


i 


sitions,  yet  it  is  important  to  recognize  that  a  few  such  cases 
occur  in  our  Mss.  in  texts  otherwise  free  from  suspicion,  i.e. 
Most.  1 100  scr/rc,  A  feu.  8yy  validus,  Andr.  596  corriga\\  Sen. 

Med.  26J  fetniuM ;  see  also  Klotz,   Gnindz.,  p.  274.     Quite 

2 

similar  to  the  treatment  of  tribrach  words  is  the  treatment  in 
iambic  verse  of  the  compound  phrases  (which  arc  often  written 
as  one  word)  ending  in  a  tribrach  or  an  anapaest,  such  as 
adeOy  iniln,  veluti,  interibi,  in  t  ere  a,  intereos,  proptered,  prop- 
tereos,  etc.  According  to  the  ancient  orthography  these 
phrases  may  equally  well  be  written  separately,  i.e.  in  ibi,  ad 
eo,  inter  ibi,  inter  ed,  etc.  (see,  eg.,  CIL.  I,  ind.  p.  609),  but 
so  far  as  concerns  the  accentuation,  they  apparently  never 
admit  of  separation  into  their  component  parts  (decomposi- 
tion), but  always  receive  the  metrical  accent  upon  the  ante- 
penult, i.e.  in  ibi,  ad  eo,  inter  ibi,  intt^r  eos. 

B.  Secondary  Accentuation.  —  I  have  so  far  discussed 
only  cases  of  the  primary  accent  in  tribrach  words,  and  students 
of  Latin  verse-accentuation  have  generally  been  content  to 
confine  their  treatment  to  these  cases.  Of  almost  equal  im- 
portance, however,  are  the  cases  of  tribrach  sequences  which 
involve  the  secondary  accent,  that  is,  in  which  the  syllables 
immediately  preceding  the  primary  accent  form  a  tribrach 
series,  as  cdldniitdtem,  miseridrum,  fdmilidrcm,  Jiildritiido,  etc. 
I  have  not  been  able  to  find  in  current  discussions  of  Latin 
verse-accentuation  any  treatment  of  cases  of  this  sort  except 
a  brief  reference  to  somewhat  similar  cases  in  an  article  by 
Lindsay,  PhiloL,  LI  (1892),  p.  373  (footnote).  In  point  of 
fact  the  secondary  accent  in  cdlamitdtein  is  observed  almost 
as  strictly  by  the  Roman  dramatists  as  the  primary  accent 
in  g^nere.  Of  the  nearly  200  cases  of  this  kind  occur- 
ring in  Plautus,  the  secondary  accent  appears  to  be  disre- 
garded in  only  two  or  three,  e.g.  in  the  iambic  verse-close  of 

AliL  562  nidlitiose  tamcn  and  in  the  bacchiac  verse-opening 

4        5  6 

of  Cist.  3  dp^rfiistis.     [With  respect  to  the  latter  case  it  is 

possible,  but  not  especially  likely,  that  the  Latin  bacchius 
admits  the  accentuation  ^u  k^  1.  instead  of  the  usual  -^  do  _:_ ; 
cf.  Christ,  Metr.f  p.  419  f.]     Terence  has  apparently  violated 


Vol.  xxxiv.J 


Latin  Monosyllables. 


67 


68 


Robert  S.  Radford. 


[1903 


tic  secondary  tribracli  accent  twice,  once  in  the  middle  of  the 
ifcrse,  once  in  the  verse-close:  Andr.  941  aim  tud  r^lfgwne 
Mum ;   Heaut.  906  dpirfsere  SstMm,      In  both  these'  cases 
©tier  scansions  than  those  which  I  have  adopted  are  possible, 
le.  rilii^ione,  op^mire,  but  not  especially  probable  (cf.  Hauler! 
Eini,  P/iorm,,  p.  54»).     The  elision  of  the  final  syllable  in 
both  cases  prevents  a  double  coniicl  and  apparently  renders 
tie  single  conflict  somewhat  less  harsh,  but  is  far  from  pro- 
ducing a  recession  of  the  accent,  i.e.  religiofie\  as  has  some- 
times  been  supposed.    It  must  be  added  that  editors  of  Terence 
have  iiot  always  sufficiently  regarded  this  secondary  accent 
in  tieir  conjectures ;  thus  the  reading  >r///V^/Xr;;/)  has  been 
adopted  by  all  recent  editors  except  Umpfenbach  in  Andr. 
232  instead  of  the  Ms.  faailiatem,  but  is  wholly  inadmissible 
in  view  of  the  unusual  conflict,  and  the  same  is  true  of 
Fleckeisen's  conjecture  cttpiditat{e\  Heaut.  208.    Finally,  this 
accentuation  occurs  once  in  the  first  foot  of  Saturnian  verse, 
if  the  quantitative  view  of  the  Saturnian  be  correct,  i.e.  Naev. 
109  (Havet)  Sieilifm/s paciscil 

We  may  sum  up  tic  conclusions  which  we  have  reached 
as  lollows:  In  words  and  compound  phrases  forming  a  tri- 
brach  such   as  genere,  inibi  {in  ibi\  etc.,  the  grammatical 
accent  is  in  rare  instances  disregarded  in  the  first  foot  of  a 
U'Crsc  or  colon ;  tiere  are  also  a  very  few  cases,  chiefly  in  the 
irst  foot  or  the  verse-close,  of  the  disregard  of  a  secondary 
tribrach  accent  in  words  like  chldmmtem.     It  is  evident  that 
in  any  tribraci  word-groups  which  wc  may  discover  to  exist 
tic  same  licenses  wlil  be  .admitted.     It  only  remains  to  note 
briefly  tiat  tie  treatment  of  syllable-groups  forming  a  dactyl 
(_  %/  v)  is  considerably  less  strict ;  that  in  dactylic  words  such 
as  pectore  a  primary  grammatical  accent  is  ratier  freely  dis- 
regarded  ia  fie  flfst  loot  and  occasionally  disregarded  in  the 
other  feet  (cf.   Klotz,  Grunds,,  p.  274  ff.);   further,  that  a 
secondary  dactylic  accent,  such  as  that  of  cdmmddttdtes,  was 
rather  freely  disregarded  by  tie  Roman  iambic  poets  prior  to 
the  time  of  Hitciriis »  in...  tieIr  strenuous  endeavors  to  form 

^  Phaedrus  has  avoided  these  accentuations  almost  entirely;  compare,  how- 
ever, in  the  wise-close  App.  21,  12:  deiinuisti  pedh. 

i        «        « 


^ 
^ 


4 


legitimate  iambic  and  trochaic  verse-closes  —  thus  in  the 
verse-close,  with  harsh  double-conflict :  Andr.  569  at  si  cor- 
rigitur,  quot  commoditattfs  vide ;  PJionn.  843  ;  cf.  284 ;  cf. 
676;  Hec.  122;  Ad.  880;  Pacuv.  trag.  frgm.  164  R. ;  id.  inc. 
LIV  R.,  etc.  —  also  occasionally  in  middle  of  verse,  with  eli- 
sion of  final  syllable,  i.e.  with  single  conflict:  Andr.  844; 
Hec.  797;  Yjoh^t.  com.  frgm.  113  R. ;  Afran.  com.  frgm.  7, 
etc. ;  finally,  we  may  note  that  dactylic  compound  phrases 
such  as  attamen^  quomodo,  ncscio,  and  obviam  admit  to  a 
certain  extent  —  most  often  in  the  first  foot  —  of  being  treated 
as  two  words  through  decomposition,  i.e.  at  tdmcn,  quo  modo^ 
ne  scio,  ob  viam  (cf,  Klotz,  Grunds.,  p.  276;  Ritschl,  Prolcg., 
p.  ccxxxvii ;  Skutsch,  ForscJi,,  p.  158).  The  reason  for  the 
difference  of  treatment  in  the  verse-accentuation  of  tribrach 
and  dactylic  words  need  not  be  discussed  here  (compare, 
however,  Klotz,  Gnmdz.^  p.  278  f.);  I  shall  only  remark  in 
conclusion  that,  owing  to  the  decomposition  (recomposition) 
which  is  admitted  even  in  the  most  frequently  occurring  dac- 
tylic compositay  it  is  not  possible  for  us  to  employ  as  rigorous 
tests  for  the  determination  of  the  regular  accent  of  dactylic 
groups  (_,  w  vy)  as  can  be  employed  in  the  case  of  tribrach 
groups  (v^,  w  w). 

II.   Comparison  with  Greek  Verse. 

It  is  evident  that  if,  in  pursuing  this  investigation,  we  shall 
find  the  Latin  tribrach  group  accented  either  wholly  or  in 
very  large  part  upon  the  initial  syllable,  i.e.  scd  agit,  the 
question  will  still  present  itself,  whether,  after  all,  there  is 
not  some  reason  in  the  special  kind  of  iambic  or  trochaic 
verse,  some  reason  in  the  placing  of  the  caesurae  for  the  non- 
occurrence of  the  accentuation  sed-dgit.  With  this  question 
in  view,  I  have  examined  about  1 500  Greek  iambic  and  tro- 
chaic verses  in  Philemon  and  Aristophanes,  and  I  find  that 
in  Greek,  where  the  influence  of  the  stress-accent  does  not 
exist,  the  two  accentuations  occur  with  equal  frequency  in 
trochaic  verse  and  in  the  longer  iambic  verses,  in  500  verses 
of  this  sort  the  metrical  accent  falling  9  times  upon  the  sec- 


Vol.  xxxiv.] 


Latin  Monosyllables, 


69 


©ed  syllable  and  an  equal  number  of  times  upon  the  initial 
syllable,  wWk  In  tlic  iambic  trimeter  the  accent  upon  the 

.second  syllabic  bcars'  to  tie  Inkial  accent  the  ratio  approxi- 
inatcly  of  2 : 3.^  Thus  the  trimeter  alone  is  found  to  be  some- 
what more  favorable  in  its  structure  to  the  initial  accent  for 
tic  reason  that  of  its  two  chief  caesurae  the  simujuinaria  is 

more  frequent  than  the  semisiptetmrm.  The  two  ni.ost  coni- 
.«©©  forms  of  a  Greek  trimeter  containing"  one  of  these 
trisyllabic  groups  may  be  seen  from  the  following  verses: 

Wkhjrgm.  90,  I   (Kock)  :  pj^i^u  rk  Kitak  ttwowi  |  ttoAAoi',  Uattora., 
M,/rgm.  90,  6  ToaovTo  yly  wi  \  to  kukov  ^Xikov  ntp  yu. 

The  results  obtained  through  an   examination   of   Greek 
verse  may  be  stated  in  detail  as  follows:  In  more  than  600 
iani'bic  trimeters  of  Philemon  the  ratio  of  the  medial  to  the 
initial  accent  is  12:19;  the  medial  accent  occurs  m  frgtuni, 
3«»  5;  44.  4;  <5o,  2;  79,  II ;  88,  9;  89,  i  ;  90,   i  ;  90,   11  ; 
98,  1;  131;  207;  240.     In  450  trimeters  of  Aristophanes's 
Eqtmits  (extending  through  v.  1025)  the  ratio  is  5:8;  the 
niedtal  accent  occurs  in  Eq.  124;  140;  202;  482;  938.     In 
150  iambic  tetrameters  of  Aristophanes  the  ratio  is  4:4;  the 
medial  accent  occurs  Eq.  iiZ\  433;  859;  899.     In  350  tro- 
chaic tctraraetcrs  and  dimeters  of  Aristophanes  {Nub.,  Eq,, 
Mm,,  Av.)  tie  ratio  is  5:5*  the  medial  accent  occurs  Eq. 
280;  Jf/.28o;  388;  396;  790.     In  the  1 500  verses  examined 
the  medial  accent  occurs  26  times,  the  initial  accent  36  tinies. 
In  niiaking  tic  count  cases  M  tic  secondary  accent,  such  as 
Piil/r^n.  100,  2,  rk  eXaXiyo-ev,  were  estimated  according  to 
tie  Latin  accent-law.     A  distinction  was  also  made  between 
real  and  apparent  trisyllabic  groups,  e.^,  in  Phil.  /r^m.  7,  i 
jkp  iwl  ri^^  '^1^%  tic  prepositioa  M  is,  of  course,  proclitic, 
and  the  irst  part  of  tie  resulting  group,  yap  cttI-to  pPj/ia,  is 
not  trisyllabic  but  quadrisyllabic.     We  may  conclude,  I  think, 
from  these  statistics  that  in  respect  to  the  placing  of  the 
metrical  accem  lipott^  tic  fest;  «  tic^.  second  syllable  of  such 

*  Hii  rmtio  will  hold  good  approximately  for  all  the  trimeters  of  the  Middle 
and  New  Comedy  according  to  the  references  given  hy  Perschinka,  D^  med.  ei  nm, 
mm,  irim,  iamk,  Dimri,  Phikl  Vindok  III,  330  ff. 


I 

) 


i 


» 


'I 


f 


4 


I 


70 


Robert  S.  Radford, 


[1903 


phrases  as  \ia  ^ia,  irpo^  e/ie,  tcl  kuko,  the  Greek  is  absolutely 
indifferent,  as  it  is  upon  the  whole  indifferent  in  the  accentua- 
tion of  the  tribrach  word.* 

III.   Summary  of  Tekentian  Usage. 

The  same  test  yields  very  different  results  when  applied  to 
the  Latin  poets.  The  accentuation  of  all  the  tribrach  groups 
occurring  in  Terence  is  given  in  detail  in  a  later  section  of 
this  paper  (p.  78  ff.),  but  since  I  wish,  before  proceeding 
farther,  to  discuss  the  origin  and  the  effects  of  this  accentua- 
tion, I  shall  here  briefly  summarize  the  results  obtained  in 
the  fuller  discussion.  There  are  in  Terence  176  certain  or 
highly  probable  cases  of  tribrach  (trisyllabic)  groups  of  the 
form  <y,  w  w  which  show  the  initial  accent,  3  certain  cases  of 
tribrach  groups  which  show  the  medial  accent,  and  half  a 
dozen  cases  in  which  the  accentuation  is  ambiguous  (see 
p.  82  f.,  p.  85).  We  may  estimate  the  ratio  of  the  initial  to 
the  medial  accent  to  be  about  40:  i,  and  we  shall  be  justified 
in  concluding  that  the  former  accentuation  alone  has  been 
known  to  the  spoken  language  of  the  republican  period.  With 
quadrisyllable  groups  of  the  form  w,  w  w  ^  the  case  is  some- 
what different ;  in  these  groups  the  accent  has  vacillated  in  the 
republican  period  between  the  first  and  the  second  syllables. 
Yet  since  the  recessive  force  of  the  accent  is  seen  to  be 
much  less  in  quadrisyllabic  words,  which  are  accented  either 
generibus  or  gfu^ribiis,'^  than  in  trisyllabic  words,  which  are 
accented  only  g-i^ncre,  and  since  consequently  the  force  of  the 
recession  is  insufficient  to  overcome  entirely  the  slight  pause 
which  falls  between  the  monosyllable  and  the  following  word, 

1  According  to  F.  Hanssen,  "  Ucber  den  gricch.  Wortictus,"  Khein.  Mus. 
XXXVII  (1882),  p.  258 ff.  (cf.  also  Ilavet,  Cows  lihn.  de  mctr.,  p.  Ii6f.)  Greek 
tragedy  is  not  wholly  indifferent  in  tribrach  words;  on  the  other  hand,  (ireek 
comedy  is  altf»gethcr  indifferent,  according  to  Humphreys,  Trans.  Am.  Phil. 
Assoc.  VII  (1876),  p.  133;   Klotz,  Grundz.,  p.  269  f.;  Perschinka,  /./.,  p.  330  AT. 

^  According  to  the  valuable  data  furnished  by  Professor  Humphreys,  who, 
after  a  comparison  of  Greek  usage,  has  made  the  necessary  corrections  for  the 
influence  of  the  verse-form  {Trans.  Am.  Phil.  Assoc.  VII,  p.  137),  the  accent 
generibus  has  been  from  three  to  five  times  as  frequent  in  the  actual  speech  of  the 
republican  period  as  the  accent  generibus. 


Vol.  xxxiv.] 


Latin  Monosyllables, 


71 


72 


Robert  S.  Radford. 


[1903 


tif  ainre  linial  acceEtuatioii  of  the  quadrisyllable  groups  has 
been  tiat  of  the  second  syllable,  i>.  sed  homines,  although 
the  initial  accent,  sid  homines,  appears  also  to  have  been  in 
current  use. 

Il  ii  Cipif '■ 'tlllijiigli  the  tendency  of  the  monosyllables  to 
coalesce  lis  pronunciation  with  the  following  word  that  trisyl- 
laMc  groups  have  been  formed  io  Latin  and  have  received 
re-accentuation  in  accordance  with  the  three-syllable  or  the 
carier  initial  accent  law.    As  has  already  been  indicated, 
tic  pause  that  divides  a  word  of  one  or  two  morae  from  the 
following  word  may  be  shown  by  numerous  metrical  tests  to 
be  extremely  brief  in  a  quantitative  language  like  the  Latin  ; 
|«t,.ffen  with  tic  iiaiinisilng  pause,  a  recession  of  the  accent 
catiiiot  cas%  arise  without  a  fixed  or  usual  order  of  words. 
Hence,  i4  as  appears  to  be  the  case,  a  general  recession  of 
the  accent  has  taken  place  in  these  groups,  this  must  be  due 
to  the  analogy  of  the  many  phrases  which  have  acquired  a 
Med  outer.      We  may  suppose  that  the  analogy  of   the 
numerous  verbal  compounds  with  monosyllabic  prepositions, 
such  as  m^&,  imeo.pereo,  snbeo,  has  first  exerted  its  influence 
and  led  to  the  recession  of  the  accent  in  all  the  trisyllabic 
locutions  of  ixcd  form  or  frequent  occurrence.     The  latter, 
the  §xed  locutions,  are  indeed  very  numerous;   thus  with 
enim  alone  we  have  ei  enim,  at  em'm,  sed  enim,  ncquc  enim, 
quidetmn,  quod  enim,  quia  emiwt,  ego  emim,  etc.,  all  of  which 
are  virtiial  €0$t^siim^  .and  m  very  frequent  use.    Again,  in 
consequence  of  the  rtllcs  of  word-position  by  which  the  per- 
sonal and  demonstrative  pronouns  are  attached  in  the  sen- 
tence  directly  t*i  pepositive  conjunctioiii,  to  interrogative 
words  and  affirraatif e  parlfeN,  a  Wiltltude  of  fixed  locutions 
arise  containing  ego  and  the  various  forms  of  is ;  i.e.  et  ego 
(Seyffert,  S/nd  Plant.,  p.  12),  nam  ego  (ibid.,  p.  20),  /ol  ego 
(ICellerhoff,  Stndem.  Stud..  H,  p  60  ff.),  quid  ego  (Kampf, 
Pronom.  Personal.,  p.  31  1%,  fmd  ^0  {ibid.,  p.  jj),  at  eg&, 
sed  ego,  dum  ego,  mM  €g9,  ele. ;  M  ea,  et  ea,  sed  enm,  at  emn 
adeitm,  in  eum,  ab  eo,  quid  €0,  etc. ;  with  homo  also  we  have 
the  frequent  phrases  hie  horn^,  is  homo,  quis  homo,  qui  homo, 
etc.    In  short,  of  the  180  cases  of  tlie  tribrach  group  found 


i 


in  Terence,  nearly  two-thirds  occur  apparently  in  fixed  locu- 
tions of  this  character.  Finally,  the  analogy  of  the  fixed 
locutions  is  followed  by  the  merely  fugitive  and  infrequent 
combinations,  %&  tie  analogy  of  quid  agit  and  idagit  is  fol- 
lowed by  sed  agit,  and  the  accentual  group  in  its  developed 
form  does  not  apparently  require  the  closest  possible  connec- 
tion in  sense,  provided  always  that  the  single  words  involved 
belong  to  the  same  clause.  Thus  we  have  not  only  the  fre- 
quent phrases  quid  ais  and  ///  ais,  but  also  Phonn.  380  quem 
amicum  tuom  ais  fuisse,  and  not  only  the  frequent  phrase  ubi 
erit,  but  also  Hcc.  474  mco  crit  ingenio. 

Lindsay  {Lat,  Lang.,  p.  167  ff.,  and  Journal  of  Philology, 
XX,  150  ff.)  and  Skutsch  {Forsch.,  p.  157  ff.),  in  treating  the 
sentence-accentuation  in  Plautus  and  Terence,  have  already 
discussed  at  length  the  proclisis  of  the  Latin  prepositions, 
but  they  have  overlooked  the  similar  proclisis  ^  of  the  mono- 
syllabic conjunctions  and  adverbs.  Yet  the  proclitic  charac- 
ter of  the  Latin  monosyllables,  as  a  class,  has  always  been 
recognized  in  a  general  way  by  Latin  metricians,  and  has 
often  been  invoked  in  the  explanation  of  special  rules  of 
Latin  prosody;  see  L,  Miiller,  Res  Mctr?,  pp.  164-170, 
460-467 ',  Ritschl,  Proleg.,  pp.  ccxiii,  ccxxxiii,  etc.;  Podi- 
aski,  Quomodo  Tcrentius  in  tetramctris  iambicis  et  trochaicis, 
etc.,  pp.  7,  10,  etc.;  O.  Brugman,  Queviadmodum  in  ianibico 
senario,Q,\.c.,  p.  18;  Kohler,  De  verb.  ace.  in  troch.  sept.  Plant., 
p.  29;  cf.  Weil  et  Benloew,  U Accentuation  lat.,  p.  56,  and 
Corssen,  Ausspr.,  IP,  862  ff.  The  Roman  grammarians  also 
recognize  no  distinction  in  character  between  the  prepositions 
and  other  monosyllabic  words,  as  the  testimony  of  Audax, 
quoted  above  (p.  64),  clearly  shows.  Finally,  the  Latin 
iambic  poets  of  the  classical  period,  when  admitting  a  short 
monosyllable  to  form   part  of  the  resolved  arsis,^  treat  the 

^  I  do  not  forget  in  making  this  statement  that  many  German  scholars  employ 
•enclisis'  as  a  general  term  for  word-grouping  (Tonanschluss),  and  avoid  entirely 
the  use  of  the  term  *  proclisis,'  which,  as  is  well  known,  is  not  of  ancient  origin, 
but  a  coinage  of  G.  Hermann's.  On  my  own  account  I  have  not  hesitated  to 
employ  'proclisis,'  after  observing  the  general  use  of  the  term  among  Romance 
scholars. 

2  By  *  arsis '  is  meant  the  strong,  or  accented  part  of  the  foot. 


Vol.  juixiv.] 


Lmiim  MGnosyllables, 


'Z 


^repoeitbns  aad  coEJunctioDs  precisely  alike ;  i.e.  they  use 
im-Hmore  and  H-^more,  with  equal  frequency,  as  quasi-quad- 
risyllabic  words;  for  examples,  see  B.  Schmidt,  De  Senccac 
^^£J'  ruiimikts  pmsGdiads  ei  meirkis,  p.  46  f . 

In  saflof  tfcat  the  Latifi,  monosyllables  are  regularly  pro- 
clitic, I  do  not  mean  to  deny  that  there  are  many  single 
phrases  in  which  monosyllabic  words  have  acquired  an  en- 
clitic Mse  through  the  observance  of  some  fixed  order.     Such 
f  Irases  are  mescm  quis  {mfsehquisX  nisi  si  {nisisi\  simul  ac 
{simulm\  etiam  nunc  (etiammtm),  and  the  like,  a  fuller  enu- 
meration  of  which  may  be  found  in  Corsscn.  Ausstr.,  IP,  835- 
861.     Especially  frequent  in  these  phrases  is  the  quantitative 
type  \j  V,  o,  which,  by  an  extension  of  usage,  seems  some- 
times to  be  pronoynced  as  a  single  word  in  the  caesurae  of 
the  chief  Latin  verses,  on  the  basis  of  the  form  alone.    Impor- 
tant as  these  enclitic  phrases  are,  they  constitute  a  very  small 
part  of  the  total  use  of  m.onosyIlabic  words.    The  parts  of 
the  siibstantiire  verb  are  also  regularly  enclitic;  compare  the 
frequent  writing  mnatasi,  amminmsi  m  our  Mss.     Hence,  it 
is  necessary  to  distinguish  carefully  between  the  groups  qltid 
if  as  alone  and  quid  (fusses/.     The  first  is  trisyllabic  (qiad 
^/»jf),;  tie  second  is  qtiadrisyllaWc,,  and  has  a  variable  accent 
i^/iid  iffiiis-fsi  or  qmid  opus  est),  just  as  we  have  found  the 
accent  to  vary  in  quid  agiiur  and  sed  kmnines.     The  case  is 
similar  with  ei  ega  m  ai  ifa  alone,  and  the  fuller  combinations 

According  to  the  view  here  adopted,  trisyllabic  groups, 
such  as  sed  em'm,  sed  ej^e,  sed  kmmo,  etc.,  have  originally 
arisen  through  the  proclisis  of  the  monosyllable,  \mt  with 
the  'rtiwlt  till  a.. 'dissf  liable  witli  short:  penult  has  practicallv 
become  cisciitic  whenever  a  monosyllable  precedes.  This 
explanation  may  appear  at  first  to  be  somewhat  at  variance 
with  the  results  reached  by  Wsiekeriiagel  in.  lis  extremely 
valuable  and  comprehensive  article,  •*Peber  e!n  Gesetz 
der  Indogermanischcn  Wortstellung,"  Indogcrman.  Forsch.,  I 
'i^QiX  P'  333  ff.  la  the  part  of  this  article  devoted  to  the 
Latin  word-order  (p.  406  ff.^),  Wackernagel  has  shown,  with 

*  Sec,  also,  the  suinmary  in  Stok.  Hist&r.  Cramm,  d.  lat  Spr.,  I,  p.  105. 


74 


Robert  S,  Radford. 


[1903 


great  completeness,  that  the  Latin  personal  and  demonstra- 
tive   pronouns   manifest   a   strong   tendency  to   occupy  the 
second  place  in  the  sentence,  —  a  place  which  is  not  only 
commonly  occupied,  in  Latin,  by  such  unemphatic  words  as 
enim,  quidcm,  etc.,  but  which  is  associated,  in  most  of  the 
Indo-European  languages,  with  accentual  weakness,  or  encli- 
sis.     It  follows  that  the  personal  and  demonstrative  pronouns 
are  enclitic  whenever  they  follow  the  prepositive  conjunctions, 
as  well  as  in  some  other  cases.     While  it  did  not  fall  within 
the  scope  of  his  article  to  treat  the  verse-accent  of  the  early 
Latin  poets,  Wackernagel  has  clearly  demonstrated,  in  sub- 
stance, that  at  some  period  of  the  Latin  language  the  initial 
accent  existed  in  many  of  the  groups  which  we  are  now  dis- 
cussing, viz.  sed  ego,  si d  cum,  quid  co,  etc.,  as  well  as  sed  tu, 
Sihimihi,  and  the  like.     I  gladly  recognize  the  great  value  of 
Wackernagel's  independent  proof  of  the  fact,  but  in  respect 
to  the  process,  although  he  has  found  it  convenient  to  employ 
the  term  'enclisis'  throughout,  I  cannot  see  that  his  results 
are  necessarily  opposed  to  the  account  which   I   have  just 
given.      In  the  first  place,  In  a  very  large  number  of   the 
trisyllabic  groups  whicli  we  are  now  discussing,  the  weakly 
accented  word  does  not,  as  a  rule,  occupy  the  second  position 
in  the  sentence,  i.e.  dd  cum,  dd  cnnu,  tibi  ego,  sdt  crat,  turn 
agam,  hie  homo,  etc.,  so  that  no  theory  of  enclisis  will  apply 
to  these  cases.     Secondly,  the  personal  and  demonstrative 
pronouns,    being   usually   employed   without    emphasis,    are 
more  or  less  weakly  accented  in  all  parts  of  the  sentence; 
hence  they  naturally  gravitate  to  the  second,  or  enclitic  posi- 
tion, which  is,  however,  rather  to  be  considered  a  proof  than 
a  cause  of  their  weakness.     In  view  of  these  considerations  it 
seems  probable  that  the  initial  accent  has  arisen  in  the  man- 
ner already  described,  although  it  is  not  to  be  denied  that  in 
some  cases  word-grouping  through  enclisis  may  also  have  op- 
erated, and  the  two  processes  may  have  gone  on  side  by  side. 
In  any  case  the   results   are   clear   enough.     The   mono- 
syllables which    are,    as   a   rule,   atonic,    often   acquire   the 
accent  of  the  word-groups  into  which  they  enter,  as  in  sid- 
homo,  sdd-homines,  and  with   the   accent   they  acquire   the 


Vol.  xxxiv.] 


Latin  Monosyllables, 


75 


power  of  shortening  a  following  unaccented  syllable,  as  in 
sid-haic^  sid-drgintL  Groups  containing  the  pronouns  ille, 
iste\  ipm^  and  iHier  weakly  ai^ceiileii.  woini%  such  as  unde^ 
omnis^  esse,  geetiMf  kerck,  ergo,  etc.,  often  adopt  a  similar 
accentuation;  tins,  on  tie  analogy  of  s^d  ego,  sid  ea,  sid 
enm,  we  have  sed  iius,  sid  ilia,  sid  istum;^  on  the  analogy 
of  sM  age,  sid  emim,  we  have  sid  irg&,  etc.  Through  false 
analogy  the  popular  pronunciation  foretimes  gave  to  the 
monosyllable  an  accent  incorrectly  and,  consequently,  dis- 
regarded a  genuine  grammatical  accent,  as  we  may  see  from 
accentaatiiins  like  sid  MxWtfir  Mrtum,  which  are  occasion- 
ally admitted  by  Plantus.  Cases  of  this  last  kind  are  very 
rare  In  Terence;  Spengel  cites  only  iho  dbsecro  {Andr,  781), 

mM  Miewst  (Emm,  233);  cf,  sid  fnterim  {£un.  607;  I/eaut. 
"1  3 

882(1));  tiiam  inveniri  (Andr.  939). 
s 

Tic  following  table  will  serve  to  show  at  a  glance  the 

manner  in  which  the  syllable-shortening  arises: 


Words. 

Word-groups. 

SHORTENrNG 

BY  Analogy. 

Dissyllabic 

irus 
dgit 

sid  hie 
tUi  amicus 

iri 

sid  haic 
tlbi  Urgenti 

Trisyllabic 

ginere 

sid  ea 
qudd  enim 
qui  erit 
quid  habuisset 
quid  opus 

sid  Ilia 
qudd  iius 
ita  ^sse 
titam  inveniri 
lit  ix-me 

Quadrisyllabic 

gineribus 

quid  opus-est 
sid  etiam 
qui  homines 

sid  dbsecro  * 
sid  interim 
quid  interest 

•  AH  sticfi  cases  as  sedMseer&,  in  wWch  a  trisyllabic  word  of  this  kind  is  short- 
ened after  a  manosyUabl%  iw«  dft  la  *'  false  analogy." 

1  The  examples  here  used  are  taken  from  Spengel,  Einleit.  Andria,  p.  xxviii  ff. 

*  Compare  Ahlberg,  Procel.^  p.  49 :  Haec  vocabula  cum  vocabulo  praecedenti 
proxime  coniuncta  quasi  enclitica  fiunt :  et  ipsus^  ut  ipsus,  sed  eccum.  This  is  a 
statement  of  the  result,  not  of  tlie  process :  a  special  form  of  accentuation,  so 


76 


Robert  S.  Radford. 


[1903 


4 


The  question  may  well  be  asked  at  this  point,  What  is  the 
accentuation  of  trisyllabic  groups  formed  by  long  monosylla- 
bles, i.e,  groups  of  the  form  _.  v.  ^  ?      Such  groups  are  not 
in  all  respects  similar  to  tribrach  groups,  for  the  reason  that 
a  somewhat  longer  pause  ('  latcns  tcmpus;  Quintil.  IX,  4,  98) 
falls  after  a  long  monosyllable  than  after  a  short;  hence  the 
long  monosyllable  possesses  a  greater  independence;  compare 
also  the  accent  ghcribus  with  cxitibcas.     I  propose  to  discuss 
the  accent  of  these  groups  in  full  elsewhere;  it  will  be  suf- 
ficient to  point  out  here  that  the  initial  accent  is  the  usual, 
though  not  the  sole,  form  of  pronunciation  for  the  republican 
period.     Thus  Plautus  and  Terence  have  only  hoc  a<re  in  the 
middle  of  the  verse,  although  Jioc  age  is  very  frequently  em- 
ployed in  the  first  foot  (cf.   p.   6%,  above);  in  addition,  hoc 
age  has  always  been  admitted  by  the  Roman   poets  in  the 
accentual  fifth  foot  of  the  hexameter.    The  recessive  accentu- 
ation has  already  been  shown  by  Lindsay  and  Skutsch  to  be 
the  rule  in  such  prepositional  groups  as  in  rem,  in  marc,  in 
locum ;  it  is  the  rule  also  in  groups  like  at  In,  sed  tamcn, 
et  tibi. 

IV.    Additional  Metrical  Tests. 

The  metrical  test  which  has  already  been  described  may  be 
applied  in  a  somewhat  different  and  perhaps  a  still  more 
striking  form.  The  application  to  which  I  refer  consists  in 
observing  the  formation  of  the  proceleusmatic  feet.  The 
iambic  proceleusmaticus  consists  of  four  shorts  arranged  in 
pairs,  the  two  pairs  being  contained  as  a  rule  in  separate 
words,  eg.  vides  hodic,  ego  tibi,  and  it  involves,  as  is  well 
known,  a  regular  agreement  of  verse  and  word  accent. 
Fortunately,  by  means  of  the  valuable  collection  which  has 
been  made  for  an  entirely  different  purpose  by  Ahlberg,  De 

contrary  to  the  general  law  of  the  Latin  accent,  can  only  have  arisen  through 
some  widespread  and  powerful  analogy.  Yet  perhaps  we  have  no  right  to  assume 
m  the  hrst  place  that  in  the  genuine  Roman  language  two  consonants  produce 
definite  length  in  unaccented  or  in  weakly  accented  syllables,  unaccented  syllables 
being  those  which  have  neither  a  genuine  primary  word-accent  nor  a  metrical 
accent;  cf.  Leo,  Plautin.  Forsch,,  p.  291;  Corssen,  Ausspr,  11,2  p.  618  ff. 


Vol.  xxxiv.] 


Latin  Monosyllables, 


77 


fr&celeusmatkis,  I,  p.    13 1   ff.,  we  can  readily  examine  the 

fortnation  of  all  the  iambic  proceleusmatici  which  occur  in 
tlie  iramalic  f>oets  of  the  republic.     In  Ahlberg's  collection 
we  find  forty-two  examples  of  the  type  vides  db  ea  (inclusive 
of  nine  examples  which  involve  syllable-shortening,  as  in  rogat 
ut  iIiMm%  hut  of  tie  type  sed  ab  ia  we  find  only  a  single  case, 
le.  CisL  S94  eg0  addnitm^  which  maybe  excused  by  the  license 
of  the  first  foot,  cf.  p.  65,  above.^    Hence  proceleusmatici  of  the 
types  sed  ab  /a,  id  ui  irus,  et  h&mo  ubi,  fieqne  ego  dmo  are  evi- 
dently avoided  by  the  iambic  poets,  although  in  these  assumed 
types  the  thesis  is  formed  in  a  thoroughly  legitimate  manner 
(see  Ahlberg,  /./.,  I,  loff.),  and  although  the  dissyllabic  arsis 
also  is  one  of  the  most  usual  forms,  see  ibid.y  p.  23.     Hence, 
since  neither  the  assumed  formation  of  the  thesis  is  avoided 
taken  separately  nor  that  of  the  arsis  taken   separately,  it 
is  clear  that  the  avoidance  of  these  types  is  due  to  the  effect 
produced  by  the  two  formations  when   occurring   together, 
and  this  effect  is  none  other  than  the  false  accent  sed  ab  //i, 
meqm  eg^  dm^.     The  twelve  examples  of  the  type  vidrs  db  ca 
cited  by  Ahlberg  from  Terence  are  as  follows  — from  the 
iambic  trimeter  (/./.,  p.  i35^-)*  ^^^^^'-  737  ego  quid  agas; 
Heatit  872  ego  d6mi  ero;  Fkorm,  98  ea  sita  erat(see  Ahlberg, 
p.  156);  Emm,  509  video  ab  ea;  Pkorm,  48  alio,  ubi  crit;  — 
froni  the  iambic  sept  and  oct.  (p.  14O' L):  Phonn.  491  capiti.  |1 
Idem  ego;  Eun,  309  modo  quod  ames;  Ad.  192  si  ego  tfbi 
illara;  — from  the  trochaic  sept.  (p.  149  f):  Plionn.  346  vide 
q«ld  agas ;  HemL  966  tibi  qui  erat ;  Eun.  224  vide  quid  agas ; 
—  from  the  tf ochalc  ocfc  (p.  Ifi):  Eun,  618  rogat  <iX  ilium. 
Similar  examples  from  Plautus  and  the  dramatic  fragments 
are:  Bacch.  508;  Men.  70;  Mil  136;  Stick.  419;  Pmn.  693; 
EttB.  imi.ffgm..2^7\  Fab.  tog.  Titin.  98;  Mil.  1257;  1276; 
Ssim.  4i|0;  M^si.  176;    Trm.%%t;  Poen.  818;    Tmc,  581; 

J  Only  tpparcnl  exceptions  are  oiered  by  Naev.  eem.  frgm.  21  quis  heri  apud 
Vt^mA  by  Scholl's  text  ©f  Trm.  693  isquidem  Wc  ipud  nos  (Mss.:  apud  nos  est 
hie),  since  ipud-te^  dpM^mm  are  reaiy  trisyllabic.  Only  apparent  also  is 
tlie  exception  l^pid.  593  ndmquid  efi»  fbl,  wbcre  tile  teal  division  is  num  quid- 
ego  ibi  (see  p.  84,  p.  98,  below).  On  the  olhcr  hand,  extremely  doubtful  even  in  ths 
ifst  f*>ot  is  such  a  proccl.  as  Fleck,  reads  with  the  Calliopian  Mss.  in  Heaut.  931: 
ti'  iS  iritt  where  Umpf.  and  Pi,  read  with  A  /«/,  et  id. 


78 


Robert  S.  Radford, 


[1903 


Mil.  994;  Rnd  731  ;    True.  879;  Aul.  734;  Epid.  641  ;  Men, 

162;  Most.  305;  833;  Pers.  832;  Capt.  461;  Cure.  160;  170; 

Trin.  715;  Amph.  748;   Pacuv.  trag.  frgm.  99;  Pseud,  ii'^i. 

The  Latin  accentuation  of  sed  agit  as  a  single  word  is  also 

made  probable  by  some  of  the  general  rules  of  Latin  prosody. 

Two  of  these  may  be  mentioned  here  :  (i)  the  absence  of  a 

full  or  genuine  word-end  within  the  trisyllabic  group  is  shown 

by  its  admission  in  all  the  uneven  feet  (see  p.  92,  below)  to 

form  the  iambic  anapaest,  i.e.  sed  agunt,  since  the  thesis  of 

this   shortened,  this   exceptionally  swift  anapaest  does  not 

in  general  admit  division  by  a  word-end  ;  see  Ritschl,  Proleg., 

p.  ccxxxvii;  Klotz,  Grunda.,  p.  307.1     (2)  The  general  law  of 

Latin  prosody  against  the  placing  of  monosyllables  before  the 

pauses  is  evidently  based  upon  their  proclitic  character;  for  it 

is  a  rule  of  the  Graeco-Roman  poetry  that  a  full  word-end 

must  fall  at  the  end  of  a  metrical  period  (Rossbach-West- 

phal,  Metr.  IP,  p.  106),  and  such  a  word-end  scarcely  falls  in 

Latin  within  a  complex  like  si-bona. 


V.   Terentian  Usage  in  Detail. 

It  seems  desirable  to  explain  clearly  the  system  of  meas- 
urements upon  which  the  following  statistics  for  the  accentua- 
tion of  tribrach  groups  in  Terence  are  based.  In  cases  which 
involve  a  primary  accent,  such  as  id  agis,  the  measurement  of 
the  tribrach  requires  no  explanation,  but  in  cases  involving  a 
secondary  accent,  it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  secondary 
group  should  be  measured  from  the  place  of  the  primary 
grammatical  accent.  Thus  in  E?in.  931  :  modo  ddiVeskeiitn^ 
Ins,  the  rule  is  not  violated  because  the  first  part  of  the  phrase 
is  quadrisyllabic  when  estimated  from  the  place  of  the  pri- 
mary accent  in  adulescentnlHS ;  on  the  other  hand  hSmo  Mu- 
lesceus  {Pkorm.  1041)  and  p61  ego  amator  (cf.  Eun.  936  cum 

1  The  metrical  law  of  Lachmann  and  Ritschl  which  forbids  the  divided  thesis 
of  the  anapaest,  etc..  is  subjected  to  thoroughgoing  criticism  by  Maurenbrecher, 
Hiatus  tnui  Verschleifung  im  alt.  Lai.,  Leipzig,  1899,  P-  26ff;  Maurenbrecher's 
careful  analysis  (/./.,  p.  31)  proves  only  that  the  law  is  not  one  of  absolute  validity, 
which  we  have  little  right  to  expect  it  to  be  in  the  case  of  poets  so  little  bound  by 
fixed  conventions  as  the  Roman  dramatists. 


Vol.  xxxiv.] 


Latin  Monosyllables, 


79 


amaiSre)w[Q  the  only  admissible  accents  in  genuine  trisyllabic 

groiips.     In  tie  cases,  also,  where  the  last  member  of  a  tri- 
syllabic phrase  coalesces  through  elision  with  some  following 
word,  as  m  §Mid  ig{&)  /miZ/r (Plant.  3Iost.  531),  there  is  clearly 
no  violation  of  the  rule ;  for  this  phrase  may  be  considered 
m^  imdt  lip"  nut  of  fiiii#  aad  eg^  alone  {qmU-ego),  but  of  ijnid 
and  igo-kodk;  d.Andr,  684  uM  Mi  erii,  though  we  find  only 
Mi  Mi  alone.    Similarly  the  complex  character  of  the  follow- 
ing prepositional  phrases  with  apud  is  clear  :  Andr.  254  niihi 
ipud-fdrum;    Meamt   377  seio,  ipud-patrem.      Finally   not 
every  chance  ocewrfcace  of  the  forms  w,  w  m  and  m.  w»  iz, 
constitutes  a  trisyllabic  sentence-group,  but  the  words   in- 
volved must  at   least  belong  to  the   same   clause   and   be 
coniiccted  m  the  sentence-enunciation.     Where  the  words 
belong  to  diilereal  clauses,  set   off    by  punctuation,    the 
rule  does  not  apply.     Hence  I   omit  from   these   statistics 
examples  both  (1)  of  the  form  w;  6  v^  and  (2)  of  the  form 
^ ;  xj  XI.,  viz.,  ( I )  Eun.  630  fit.  ubi ;  Hcant.  1 54  fit,  libi ;  628*  ^ 
ego>^rus;,  F/mrm,  1029  sic  dabo :  age;  Hec.  610  pol.  Ijabi; 
637  fit  lea;  Jnf.  646   Quid?|K*go;   cf.    943   haecquidem. 
II  %e;  946*  quid?  II  ego  (Dziatzko);  982  da  modo.  H  age.— 
(2)  Amir,  713  siqufd.  |  age ;  NrmtL  974  ego,  id  obesse ;  Enn. 
252  nigo;   ait?;   cf.  3^1    sine.  |  at  eniro   istaec.    To   prac- 
tically  the  same  head  should  be  referred  two  apparent  excep- 
tions in  which  the  monosyllable  is  closely  connected  with  the 
preceding  word  through   elision,  and   at   the   same  time  is 
separated  ffom  the  following  dissyllable  by  the  principal 
caesura,  r,^, : 

^jiii,  512:   UM    v^ni,  caus(am),  ut  |  Ibi    mandrem,    r^pperit. 

Mid.  394  Tiriimpliat  |  h6c  piovl<o)  wt,  |  ibi  tcmpiis  si^t. 

It  woild  be  harsh  and  unnatural  in  these  examples  to  read 
«/  I  iW,  «#|  'mM  and  tjwi  place  a  caesura.,,  within  the  short- 
ened anapaest ;  we  should  rather  consider  uf-idi  as  separated 
by  a  species  of  tmesis  and  causam  ut  when  followed  by  the 
principal  caesura  as  equivalent  to  a  single  word  in  the  same 
manner  in  which  wc  are  accustomed  to  read  well-known 

»  •  indicates  passages  where  llie  lait  ii  uncertain  and  editors  are  at  variance. 


80 


Robert  S.  Radford. 


[1903 


Vergilian  lines  such  as  *  Multum  illc  ct  \  terris,'  where  illct  is 
metrically  a  single  word ;  cf.  L.  Muller,  AV^-  Mctr,,  pp.  275, 
350.  In  conclusion  we  may  summarize  the  rule  for  measur- 
ing and  accenting  trisyllabic  groups  as  follows :  Any  three 
short  syllables,  the  first  of  which  is  a  monosyllable  or  a  dis- 
syllable  reduced  to  a  monosyllable  by  elision,  receive  the  met- 
rical accent  only  upon  the  initial  syllable,  i.e.  6,  s^  ^  or  6,^,^, 
in  case  the  three  shorts  immediately  precede  a  fixed  word- 
accent  and  belong  to  the  same  clause. 

I  shall  consider  the  example  of  tribrach  groups  occurring 
in  Terence  under  the  following  divisions  :  A.  necessary  cases 
of  the  accentuation  s^d  ^^-//{with  2  subdivisions):  B.  appar- 
ent exceptions,  such  as  at  ita  vie,  quod  opus  est:  C.  real  cx- 
cei)tions  attested  by  the  Mss.  transmission. 

A.  Nfxessary  Cases  of  the  Accent  sed  agit.  —  (a)  Cases 
in  which  the  quantity  of  the  final  syllable  is  certain  in  each  in- 
dividual case,  inclusive  of  the  cases  of  final  -j-  not  making 
position  in  thesis.  Especially  noteworthy  are  the  phrases  sed- 
^g^^\  ^git,  aget,  age,  m,  cris,  erit,  ems,  era,  ita,  opus  e<ro 
optnor,  etc.  Cf.  quid  agis  Andr.  134;  //raut.  947;  976- 
P/iorm,  216;  Ad  60;  780;  — quie  agis  Ad  680;  — sat  agit 
I/eaut.  225  (Mss.  reading); —  quf  aget  Phorm.  27;  — age 
age  /feaut.  332  ;  722  ;  P/wrm,  662 ;  Ad  877.  In  I/eaut.  61 1 
most  editors  read : 

'  N6n  em6' :  quid  agis?  |1  Optata  I6quere.  1|  Qui  ?  |1  Non  (5st  opus. 

But  Fleck,  has  already  adopted  here  the  reading  of  the  best 
Mss.  of  the  Calliopian  recension,  viz.,  ages  D^G*  (P  gis  /;/ 
ras.\  on  the  ground  that  the  future  tense  is  better  suited  to 
the  sense,  cf.  v.  608 :  egon  ?  ad  Menedemum  ,'bo :  dicam. 
For  the  textual  corruption,  compare  especially  Ad  343  where 
all  Mss.  except  A  have  quid  agis  instead  of  the  quid  a^r^s  re- 
quired  by  the  sense.  [Xote  further  quid  agis  Ace.  tra^^/r^m 
191  R.  ;  Lucil.  XXIX,  No.  31  M.  ;-i'd  agit  Enn.  tragfgm. 
1S5  R. ;  — quod  agis  Terentianus  Maurus  2368;  quid  dgis 
occurs  once  in  the  whole  Roman  literature  in  an  apparently 
sound  text,  viz..  Sen.  Troad  607  ./;//./  dgis,  Uli'xe,  where  it 
may  be  explamed  as  due  to  the  license  of  the  first  foot.     Ac- 


Vol.  xjotiv.] 


Latin  Monosyllables. 


8i 


82 


Robe  ft  S.  Radford. 


[1903 


■cording  to^^  the  refereRCes  for  agis  in  Lodge's  Lexicon  Plan- 
timtm  the  type  sid  mgis  is  fotind  in  Plautus  47  times  in  the 
following  phrases:  quid  agis  (28  times),  siqui'd  agis  (6  times), 
qnd  agis  (2),  tii  agis  (2),  t^  agis  (3),  vi  agis  ( i ),  rem  agis  ( i ), 
bene  agis ( I )»  mile  agis (iX  quod  agis  (iX  idagis  (i),  cf.  for 
tic  ImtCmf,  Gloss.  Lai..  II  761,  11,  12.  Pkutus  also  has 
qufd  agit  (3  timesX  tiia  agit  (uxor)  (1),  satagit  (i);  the  cor- 
rupt texts  Aid.  658,  3iil.  81 1  are  omitted.  There  are  only  4 
passages  in  the  dramatists  in  which  the  scansion  quid  dgls  (in- 
stead of  fiiidag-is)  is  even  possible,,  viz.  Rml.  337  ;  Lun.  378  ; 
797;  Ace.  irag.frgTfi,  135  R. ;  three  of  these  cases  belong  to 
the  first  foot.  The  type  sed  a^e  (references  in  Lodge,  Lex. 
Flaiii,}  occurs  in  Plautus  6  times  as  follows :  sed  age  ( 1 ), 
age  age  (2),  rim  age  (i )»  palam  age  (i),  tua  age  ( i ).] 

Jimdr,  337  nfsi  ea;  Ssj  ubi  ea;  Hemit.  334  an  ea;  Pliorm. 
480  qiud  eum.>  ||  Ut;  1015  sed  ea; — Andr.  420  tibi  erit; 
684  ubi  erit;  Phorm.  889  datum  erit;  Hec.  474  meo  erit;  — 
qufd  ita  J#i^/.  371;  Enn.  366;  725;  861;  897;  959;  1008; 
MeaMt  6fO;  F/ierm.  568; — lieaut.  874  ncque  ita ;  941  sed 
ita;  Ad,  161  in  ita;  483  nisi  ita;  —  Fhorm.  47  ubi  era;  634 
lit  erus;  cf.  471  et  quidem  ere,  which  may,  however,  be  taken 
as  etqufdeni:  ere.  Umpf.  and  Dz,  read  tibi  ire  Andr.  508,  but 
the  text  is  corrupt  and  the  order  much  confused  in  the  Mss. ; 
Fairclough  now  reads  tibi  ere,.  Fleckeisen  tibi  reniintio,  ire. 
An  exception  might  seem  to  be  offered  also  by  I  Ice.  'jc)g : 

Edepol  Ti^  meam  ems  esse  6perara  dtJputdt  parvi  preti, 

but  we  need  not  hesitate  to  accept  here  the  order  which  is 
found  in  D  (and  also  in  F):  ii  erits,  i.e.  isse  ems.     [Note 

also  qu6  erus  Pompon,  com.  frgm.  45  R.  According  to  a 
collection  ^of'  f xiiii^ples  whieli,  in  part  »  based  upon  the  Le- 
maire  Index  and  is,  therefore,  only  approjcimate.ly  complete, 
Plautus  has  the  type  sed  ems  {err,  era)  31  times.  The  four 
passages  in  which  either  sed  ems  m  sed  enis  (with  length  by 
position)  is  possible,,.  9m  tO'  be  read,  according  to  the  latter 
scansion,  siilce  ccrtftio  cases  of  eris'  are  not  rare  in  Plautus. 
The  accent  nisi  ims  in  a  single  apparently  correct  text  {Poen. 
839)  may  be  explained  as  due  to  the  license  of  the  first  foot 


1 


f 


of  a  colon  (fifth  foot  of  the  septenarius).]  — quid  opus,  Andr. 
490;  Phorm.  •j^Zl-^P/wrm.  440  siquid  opus,  i.e.  si  quid 
opus;  654  sed  mfhi  opus  (probable  scansion);  681  tibi  opus; 
716  Ita  opus;  Ad.  996  quod  opus.  The  ambiguous  passage 
Eun.  223  SI  sit  opus,  vel  totum  is  to  be  read  opfis,  as  is  also 
Ad.  617  id  anus  mihi ;  for  certain  cases  of  ophs  in  Terence, 
see  Meant.  80;  Ad.  254,  etc.  [Note  also  Afran.  coin.  frgm. 
145  R.  fit  opus;  Titin.  com. frgm.  4  R.  id  opus;  cf.  Pompon. 
com.  frgm.  66  R.  age  anus.  The  usage  of  Plautus  is  similar 
in  respect  both  to  opus  and  to  anns ;  a  single  exception,  in 
opus  Fidnl  75,  is  due  to  the  license  of  the  first  foot.]  For 
apparent  exceptions  occurring  in  (jnid  opus-cst  and  similar 
phrases  with  est,  see  p.  ^j,  below. 

Hec.  538  ut  ego  opinor;  for  the  numerous  examples  of  this 
phrase  in  Plautus,  where  it  is  always  similarly  accented,  see 
Kiimpf,  Pronom.  Personal,  p.  4;  cf.  Andr.  179  neque  ut 
opinor;  /://;/.  m  quom  ibi  adessent ;  242  quae  habitudost ; 
522  quid  habuisset;  588  fa  alienas  ;  606  pol  ego  is  essem  ; 
764  volo  ego  adesse;  926  quod  ei  amorem ;  Meant.  191  ad 
eam  in  urbem ;  592  tibi  opis ;  6%7  kt  id  omitto ;  836  pro  ali- 
mentis  ;  Phorm.  94  mihi  onus  ;  cf.  175  ego  in  eum  incidi ;  332 
quia  enim  in  illis;  412  ^go  adipiscar;  509  quod  homo  inhu- 
manissumus;  531  s^d  utut ;  545  Geta  alienus;  553  siqufd 
opis;  1041  homo  adulesccns ;  1046  quod  is  iubebit;  zi.  Ad. 
232  tum  agam  ubi  ^  illinc.     (  Total  73.) 

(/S)  Cases  in  which  the  quantities  of  the  final  syllables  are 
not  perhaps  altogether  certain  in  single  cases,  but  are  suf- 
ficiently certain  collectively.  It  is  generally  agreed  by  Ter- 
entian  critics  that  many  final  syllables  which  were  *  half-long ' 
or  prevailingly  long  in  Plautus  are  to  be  considered  as  defi- 
nitely short  in  Terence  ;  thus  verbal  forms  in  -at  and  -ct  which 
were  originally  iambic,  such  as  erat,  amat,  amct,  habct,  are 
pyrrhics  in  Terence  (see  Bomer,  De  cornptione  vocab.  iamb. 
Terentiana,  p.  12);  homo  retains  a  long  final  only  in  arsis 
(Bomer,  /./.,  p.  18;  Fabia,  ed.  Ad.,  p.  55);  ego,  ibi,  ubi  have 
a  long  final  only  in  arsis,  and  even  then  in  very  rare  cases 

1 A  dissyllable  when  elided  is  commonly  treated  as  a  monosyllable  in  Latin. 


Vol.  xxxiv.] 


Latin  Monosyllables, 


83 


84 


Robert  S.  Radford, 


[1903 


(Klotz,  Grunds,.^!^.  5 if-;  Bomer,  /./.,  p.  34,  p.  63;  Hauler, 
Ank  jr.  Pk&nm.^  ¥.  176).  On  the  other  hand  verbal  forms  of 
the  first  and  secund  persons,  sncli  as  ago,  em^  ems,  habes,  abis, 
are  probably  lo  be  considered  as  having  more  often  a  long 
final  in  Terence;  hence  cases  like  Andr.  614  id  ago,  714  domi 
ero,*  will  not  be  included  in  this  collection.  On  the  principles 
littt  Stated'"' 'ire  '\mm  tie  following  examples  of  groups  in  vol  v- 
ing  the  so<:aHed  'half-longs':  (i)  erat,  a,„at,  amct,  habct ; 
Eun.  736  sat  erat  (or  sdterat,  like  poterat ;  see  Leo,  Plant. 
Forsck,^  p.  2(^\  L.  M idler,  Res.  MetK,  p.  466  f.,  and  compare 
the  word-divisioQ  in  the  Piaiitus  Mss.)  ;  Meant.  Gig  sed  erat ; 
966^  qif  e«it;  Pkmm:,.  97  sita  erat;  768  .sat  erat  (saterat); 
Ad.  494  mfhierat;  Eun.  986  quid?  amat?;  Ad.  341  quom 
amet;  Andr,  954  quia  habet;  Meant.  835  decem  habet; 
P/mrm,  ID41  si  habet;  Ad.  382  sibi  habet;  —  (2)  Aomo:  mi 
ioiiiO'  Amdr.  f2i;  Pkorm.  lOOj;  Ad.  t%6\  —  Andr.  j-jZ  p6l 
homo ;  Eun.  960  quis  homo ;  — (3)  tf/i/(f ),  ibi,  nbi:  cf.  Phorm. 
198  modo  a  pud  portum  ;  Andr.  343  scd  ubi ;  928  is  ubi ;  Enn. 
719  pirem  ubi;  Meant.  983  ct  ibi;  cf.  Phorm.  827  sed  ubi 
MH» ;  cl  Ad.  sa?  iii4  wM ;  5,70  scfo  uM.  On  the  other  hand 
ill  two  ambiguous  passages  we  should  scan  ///;/  and  ibi:  Eun. 
414  is  iiW  molestus;  Ad.  584  quid   ibi  facit;    the  latter  is 

rightlj  s©  scanned  by  Spengel,  for  the  original  quantity  is 
preferable  on  other  grounds  in  the  pure  seventh  foot  of  the 
septenar i us.    {  Total  24. ) 

(4)  Tie  following  phrases  occur  with  ego  in  Terence :  an 
ego^  di'^git^  mfm4d.^9  (i,c,  #r  fuM  ego%.  it  ego,  (et  qnidem  ego\ 
M  ip?!  Udem  ego,  ndm  ego,  nique  ego,  nisi  ego,  qndsi  ego,  quid 
ego,  qnSd  ego,  qudm  ego,  quim  ego,  quom  ego,  sM  ego,  tibi  ego, 
imm  ego,  vir  ego,  ubi  ego,  ut  ego:  —  Andr.  252  ;  508  (id  ego, 
rightly  scaanei-"  as  trociaic'  iwrsc  hj  Fleck.,  and  Faircl.) ;  5 19 ; 
563;  612;  S|0;  886;  944;  Enn.  142;  265;  293;  496;  822; 
930;  958;  1081;  1086;  Meami.  191 ;  252  ;  529  (quid  ego  ni); 
563;  631  ;  663;  686;  956;  993;  lO^ilP/iorm.  491  ;  519;  587; 
685  ;  844  ;  1000 ;  1031 ;  1052 ;  Hec.  98 ;  ( 195  :  el  qufdem  ego, 
or  etqufdepi  ego);  408;  524;  564;  850 (rightly  scanned  as  tro- 

^  This  is  tlie  nccentuatioii  of  Spengel  and  Fleck.,  and  is  approved  by  C.  F.  W. 
Muller,  Ptami.  Prm^  pp.  I5J»  lit ;  olief  editors  accent  wrongly  domi  ero. 


chaic  by  Umpf.  and  Dz.);  Ad.  128  ;  256 ;  378  ;  568  ;  749* ;  784 ; 
S77  {ecqnld  ego);  916 ;  (946,  Umpf.) ;  972  (  Total  50).     In  the 
example  ecqnid  ego  cited  from  Ad.  ^-jj  we  have  what  appears 
at  first  the  inadmissible  accentuation  of  a  trochaic  word  upon 
the  ultima,  cf.  Podiaski,  /./.,  p.  62  ;    but  this  accentuation  is 
only  apparent;  for  all  the  compounds  formed  of  two  mono- 
syllables admit  in    early  Latin  of  being  resolved  into  their 
original  parts  (Ritschl,  Prohg.,  p.  ccxxii  f . ;   Klotz,  Grundz., 
p.  324).     Hence  we  may  write  here  if  we  wish  ec  quid  ego, 
just  as  we  often  find  this  division  in  the  Plautus  Mss.  {e.g.  in 
B  ec  quid   Cas.  242,  et  quid  Aviph.  577,  etc.),  and  as  Leo 
writes  in  Sen.  Oed.  263  quid  quid  ego  fugi ;  see  also  the  lat- 
ter's  remarks.  Plant.  Forsch.,  p.  236.     The  extent  to  which 
the  expressions  containing  ego  have  acquired  a  fixed  order 
and  become  phraseological  may  be  seen  from  the  fact  that 
the  full  form  qnid  ego  without  elision  occurs  in  Terence  13 
times,  quod  ego  7  times,  at  ego  and  scd  ego  4  times  each,  //  ego 
3  times,  etc.     That  qnidcgo  and  quidille  possess  most  of  the 
characteristics  of  actual  compounds  may  be  seen  further  from 
the  fact  that  they  take  precedence  over  the  compound  qnidni 
or  qninni^\  for  in  connection  with  ego  and  ilL  qnidni {qninni) 
suffers  tmesis  and  the  forms  qnid  ego  ni  {Meant.  529),  quid 
illam  ni{Ad.  662)  result;  for  additional  examples,  see  Plessis 
on  Ad.  662  and  Brix-Niemeyer  on  J/il   11 20.     Hence  so  far 
as^  the  actual  usage  of  the  language  is  concerned,  Priscian 
(Keil,  in,  24,  23  f.)appears  to  be  mistaken  when  he  says  that 
the  conjunctions  enter  into  composition  with  no  words  which 
are  declined  except  with  the  indefinite  pronouns,  i.e.  in  siqnis, 
neqnis,  nnmqnis.     We  may  be  sure  that  if  the  Latin  gram- 
marians had  had  occasion  to  develop  fully  this  topic  and  to 
discuss  in  an  independent  manner  the  compounds  capable  of 
being  formed  with  the  help  of  conjunctions,  they  would  have 
shown  differences  of  opinion  at  this  point,  just  as  they  differ 
widely  in  the  lists  which  they  give  of  the  compound  conjunc- 
tions and  of  the  prepositions  which  may  serve  to  form  com- 
pound verbs  (on  the  latter  contrast,  for  example,  Priscian,  Keil, 

1  For  the  latter  form,  see  Cledonius,  Keil,  V,  66,  i6  ;  Corp.  Gloss.  Lai.  IV,  158, 
19,  etc. 


Vol.  xjciiv.] 


Latin  Monosyllables. 


8S 


m 


Robert  S.  Radford. 


[1903 


III,  56>  9f.  with  Donatus,  IV,  366,  10  f.,  who  excluding  only 

^i^d  aid  pms  leaves  ample  xtmm  for  such  compounds  as 
c&nirqfaeem^  pmptervolmre}  fropteresse^  etc.).  We  can  cer- 
tainly recognize  »o  difference  in  closeness  of  connection 
between  si-qmis  and  si^ego,  between  ec-quis  and  et-ille,  and  if 
the  ■qttcstion  be  decided  on  the  basis  of  the  accent  to  which 
Priscian  so  constantly  appeals  ia.  the  determination  of  compo- 
siia  and  on  the  basis  of  such  usages  as  quid  ego  m\  we  should 
be  compelled  to  recognize  the  phrases  which  are  made  up  of 
€©|lj«nctions  '^md  of  the  personal  or  demonstrative  pronouns 
as  ^omposita  in  the  sen.se  of  improper  compounds.^  On  the 
other  hand,  if  we  adopt  the  traditional  orthography,  i.e.  the 
usual  word-division,  as  our  standard,  we  shall  recognize  more 
Ittstiication  for  Priscian*s  statement;  for  sic/nis,  eeqids,  quis- 
qmiSf  etc.,  are  written  very  frequently  together  in  Mss,  and 
inscrii)tions,  while  we  find,  e.g,  in  the  Plautus  Mss.,  the 
orthography /i?/i;^£i,  quiaego,  sedego^  siego,  etc.,  less  frequently. 
That  sM  ego  is  the  only  accent  known  to  Terence  is  also 
strikingly  shown  by  the  small  number  of  cases  in  which  the 
scansion  appears  doubtful.  For  Terentian  critics  are  agreed 
that  the  scansion  ego  is  quite  rare  in  Terence,  and  conse- 
qpently  we  are  not  at  liberty  to  assume  this  scansion  freely. 
la  piiiat  of  fact,  wMk  s/d  egO'  h  certain  in  50  passages,  we 
shall  need  to  assume  sed  ego  in  only  3  passages,  viz. 
HeauL  309  ita  timuL  ||  at  eg<S  nihil  esse;  610  nunc  tibi  ego 

respdndeo ;  Hee,  243  ctsf  scio  ego,  Philiimena.    There  are  no 

*  Hairct  writes  pr§piermhm  as  a  compound  in  Phaedrus ;  see  his  remarks, 
:«/.  Pkmdr.t  p»2l8,  §  93. 

2  Lindsay,  Zul.  Ziwi^ ,  p.  361  «.,  has  some  just  remarks  upon  word-groups  as 
iiHinguished  from  genuine  compounds,  and  upon  the  difficulty  of  always  distin- 
guishing sharply  between  the  two.  Since  the  present  study  is  for  obvious  reasons 
based  upun  the  ancient  terminology,  I  have  purposely  taken  no  account  of  the 
difference  which  ewsts  in  modem  usage  between  the  two  terms ;  see  further, 
p.  100,  below.  ll|loll  the  difficulty  of  distinguishing  genuine  composition  from 
*  enclisis '  in  many  cases,  see  also  Stolz,  Hist.  Gramm.  d.  lat.  Sprac/ie,  I,  p.  404  ff. 
Of  course  the  true  view  is  that  neither  siquis  nor  siego,  neither  etenim  nor  quid- 
enim^  neither  respublica  nor  iusiurandum,  elfc,  are  genuine  compounds  in  the 
modern  sense,  though  all  alike  are  composita  according  to  the  grammarians'  use 
of  the  term,  which  is  based  primarily  upon  the  meaning  and  the  accentuation 
(e.  g.  Priscian,  Keil,  II,  177, 15  C). 


Other  passages  in  Terence  which  present  any  difficulty  ;  for  in 
Andr.  762  the  reading  tibi  dico  ego  an  (Umpf.,  Fleck.)  is  as 
well  supported  as  tibi  ego  dico  an,  and  in  Enn.  155  Umpf. 
retains  the  Ms.  reading  aut  ego  in  place  of  the  correction  at 

ego.  Cases  like  Afidr.  967  et  ciuidem  6go,  i.e.  6tquidem  ego 
scarcely  require  mention  after  the  researches  of  Luchs  (Gw/;;/. 
Prasad.  II)  and  Ahlberg  (/*;-(7tY7.  I,  p.  62  ff.)upon  the  enclisis 
of  quidem  and  11  view  of  the  orthography  Jiicquidtui,  i/hqni- 
dem,  etc.,  now  generally  adopted  by  our  editors.  Besides  the 
eomposititm  iHquidem,  like  cttamcn,  scdtanuii,  sitmiicu,  etc.,  is 
expressly  attested  by  the  grammarians (Audax,  Keil,  VII,  349, 
18).  Here  belong  also  Atuir.  164  quemquidem  ego  si;  Meant. 
632  fdquidem  ^go,  si.  For  examples  involving  ego  me  (egome) 
and  ego  sum  {cgasum\  see  the  treatment  of  quadrisyllable 
groups  below  (p.  90). 

(5)  Cases  of  Ms  and  dit  seem  to  acquire  a  separate  treat- 
ment, since  Fleckeisea  has  shown  that  this  verb  was  originally 
inflected  according  to  the  fourth  conjugation  and  with  long 
final  syllable;  cf.  Brix-Nicmeyer  on  Men.  487.  Whether, 
however,  the  long  final  of  a'is  is  retained  by  Terence  under 
any  conditions  is  extremely  doubtful ;  for  this  scansion,  though 
accepted  by  Hauler  and  by  most  editors,  rests  solely  upon 
the  uncertain  reading  ah  adventum  in  P/iorm.  315  ;  the  two 
other  passages  sometimes  quoted,  Hcc.  346  and  Ad.  570  qnid 
a'isf  may  both  be  explained  like  decipls  .=*  PJiorm.  528,  as 
cases  of  syllaba  anceps  in  pansa  (see  Hauler's  note  on  Phorm. 
528;  Bomer,  /./.,  p.  11).  In  any  case  the  final  syllable  of 
ais  is  short  in  thesis  in  Terence,  and  the  phrases  quid  ais, 
quid  t4  afs^  quid  ait,  etc.,  are  to  be  considered  tribrach  groups 
in  the  following  passages :  Andr.  184;  517;  575;  588;  616; 
665*  :  872  ;  933  (quid  tii  ais) ;  Eun.  334  ;  425  ;  654 ;  748  ;  829 ; 
948;  957;  Meant.  182;  303  (quid  ait);  701;  Phorm.  199; 
38o(tuom  ais);  383  (qui  ais);  700(utais);  755;  873;  1004; 
Hee.  236;  523;  Ad.  556;  920  (quid  tii  ais).     {Total,  29.) 

(6)  Cases  involving  enim  require  special  mention.  As  is 
well  known,  the  final  ;//  of  this  particle  was  especially  weak 
in  early  Latin,  and  Leo,  Plant.  Forsch.,  p.  302  ff.,  has  even 
made  an  attempt  to  show  that  it  was  not  pronounced  before 


Vol.  xxxiv.] 


Latin  Monosyllables, 


87 


m 


Robert  S.  Radford. 


[1903 


tbe  time  of  Lucilius.     This  extreme  view,  which  Leo  would 

.iTO^lf  pfiibftlily  mm  wmh  tt'  modify,  must  be  rejected  for 
many  reasons,  atid  especially  because  it  is  not  possible  to 
accent  et  ini^  mi  imi  in  Plautus  and  Terence.  It  is,  however, 
a  reasonable  view  that  except  in  arsis  the  final  ;;/  of  r;//;;/, 
like  the  final  s  #f  other  words,  was  very  faintly  pronounced 
in  early  Latin ;  bence  tbe  following  cases  of  dt  mi,  ^t  eni} 
id  eni^  quia  emi,  quid  eni  probably  belong  anion f]j  tribrach 
groups:  i4«^r.  848;  /:////.  751;  1074;  ^r^///.  31 7 (bis);  713; 
Soo;  FMm^M,  4B7;  Mec,  311 ;  Ad.  730;  830.    {Total,  11.) 

B.  Appaeewt  Exceptions,  which  are  really  Quadrisvl- 
LABrc  Groups. —  It  remains  to  notice  those  cases  in  which  the 
group  \^,  \j\j  appears  at  first  to  be  accented  upon  the  second 
syllable,  but  in  which  tbe  accentuation  is  really  ^,  C  w,  v^ 
througb  the  attacbaient  of  an  enclitic  at  tbe  farther  end  of 
the  phrase.  These  groups  which  are  few  in  number  may  be 
distinguished  very  definitely ;  they  are  formed  either  by  the 
attachment  of  tbe  substantive  verb  in  certain  phrases,  as 
#/«#  ##l'(cl  &fimi%  €^0  smm  {eg&sum\  or  by  the  attachment 
of  tbe  personal  pronouns,  as  in  the  formulae  ego  me,  ego  te, 
etc.  {egome,  ^^^^^)*  ^^^  ^*^^  (itame\ 

(i)  It  has  long  been  recognized  by  metricians  that  parts  of 
tbe  substaalivc  verb  like  r*/,  51/,  Ji#iii,  sim  constitute  one  phrase 
with  the  preceding  word,  especially  if  the  latter  be  a  word 
ending  In  a  pyrrbic,  a  trochee,  or  a  tribrach  (L.  Miiller,  Res 
Metr.^  p,  4i6;  cf.  Lindsay,  Lat.  Lang.,  p.  167,  and  Classical 
Reviewg  V  (i%iX  P-  405)-  It  can  cause  no  surprise  then  to 
find  the  accents  sed'^fts-esi^'  and  sid  ifpns  est  equally  fre- 
quent in  the  dramatic  poets.  Terence  has  four  cases  of  the 
former:  Heaut.  558;  Ad.  601;  Andr.  638;  265  sed  nunc 
peropiis  <^t,  i.e.  per  6p$s  mi?     He  has  also  four  cases  of 

*  On  eiemm  in  Terence,  see  Clement,  A./.P.  XVIII,  414 ;  in  Eun.  1074  et 
enim  still  has,  according  I©  Langen  {fiei/ragi^  f,  271),  the  meaning  of  "  und 
wahrlich."  On  postpositive  etenim,  iee  Qement,  A./.P.  VII,  82;  similarly,  we 
often  find  in  the  poets  postpositive  sed  enim,  neque  enim^  quid  enim. 

2  With  sed  i'ipm  est,  compare  cases  like  exeute-dum  {Aul.  646),  circumspice- 
dum  {A/osf.  472),  accipe-sis  {Pers.  412)5  see  Ritschl,  Opusc.  II,  568;  Klotz, 
Crimdz.,  p.  311. 

3  Compounds  witli  intensive  per-  are  separable  compounds,  as  Andr.  486,  per 


the  latter:  Enn.  479;  PJiorm.  560;  Hcc.  'jSZ',  865.  The  in- 
fluence of  the  copula  upon  the  accent  is  usually  but  not 
necessarily  confined  to  frequent  formulae ;  thus  the  drama- 
tists have  no  example  of  sid cms  est,  yet  we  find  Com.  frgm. 
inc.  inc.  74^  R.  liic  dgcr  est.  A  second  very  frequent  formula 
is  ego  sum,  and  the  evidence  that  it  was  often  viewed  by 
the  Roman  as  a  single  word  is  complete.  Thus  cgosum  is 
glossed  as  one  word,  Corp.  Gloss.  Lat.,  Ill,  406,  4,  it  is 
provided  with  an  abbreviation  in  the  Commcntarii  Not.  Ti- 
ronian.,  it  is  counted  as  a  word  of  six  letters  in  the  ingen- 
iously constructed  verses  of  the  carmina  diiodccim  sapientinm, 
Baehrens, /*^rA  Lat.  min.  IV,  p.  120,  v.  10  (see  Baehrens, 
/,/.,  \,  praef.,  p.  XII),  finally  it  is  not  infrequently  written  as 
a  single  word  in  the  *  vetus  *  of  Plautus,  e.g.  egosnm,  Mil.  427 ; 
atcgosiim  perditus,  Poen.  1379;  for  the  similar  enclitic  forms 
potissum,  potissit,  etc.,  see  Leo,  Plant.  Forsch.,  p.  267,  and 
Neue-Wagener,  F&rmcnlehre  d*  lat.  Spr.  II,  p.  176  f.  Hence 
Terence  writes  Andr.  245  quemquam  ut  ego  sum  ;  cf.  Heaut. 
825  ego  homo  sum  (or,  homo  sum),  but  he  has  also  quam  ego 

sum,  Euu.  527  and  Phorm.  808.^ 

ecastor  scitus  puer;  see  Lindsay,  Lat.  Lang.,  p.  198.  Altogether  similar  to 
peyiSpm  est  zxQ.  the  Plautine  nescio  qiiis,  nescio  pol,  i.e.  ne  scioquis,  etc.,  on  which 
see  Luchs,  fLermes,  VI,  264  ff. 

1  Similarly,  punctuation  is  very  possibly  intentionally  omitted  Mon.  Anc.  I,  28 
ductisunt ;  VI,  16  [appe]llatussum.  The  present  context  naturally  suggests  some 
comment  upon  the  formulae  est  enim,  sunt  enim.  As  is  well  known,  the  differ- 
ence between  — est  enim,  the  regular  order,  and  —  enim  est,  the  occasional  order, 
has  l)een  much  discussed;  for  the  literature  of  the  subject,  see  Reisig-Schmalz, 
Vorles.  Ill,  850  f.  The  view  of  Madvig  {de  Fin.,  p.  92)  and  Drager  {IListor. 
Syntax,  II,  164  f.)  on  this  question  is  correct,  i.e.  in  the  position  sapientia  est 
enim  the  copula  is  formally  enclitic  and  forms  a  word -complex  with  sapientia. 
Hence  the  form  of  statement  adopted  by  Neue-Wagener,  Formenlehre  d.  lat.  Spr. 
II,  p.  977  ff.,  is  not  wholly  satisfactory:  "  Sehr  haufig  steht  enim  an  dritter 
Stelle,  wenn  eine  Form  von  esse,  besonders  est,  mit  einem  Worte  oder  einem  Satz- 
theile  vorausgeht,  wie  acta  est  enim,  pro  Cluent.  37,  104."  It  should  rather  be 
said  that  in  such  cases  enim  stands  in  what  is  apparently  the  third  place  ;  for  in 
examples  like  satis  est  enim,  expressa  sunt  enim,  the  particle  no  more  occupies 
the  third  place  in  reality  than  it  does  in  the  examples  a  Graecis  enim,  ab  iis  enim 
(also  cited  by  Neue),  where  it  stands  after  a  preposition  and  its  case.  This 
arrangement  constitutes  the  regular  usage,  as  may  be  seen  from  the  examples  in 
Neue  and  Drager.     On  the  other  hand,  as  Priscian  so  often  teaches,  word-com- 


V'A  xxxiv.] 


Latin  Monosyllables, 


89 


90 


Robert  S.  Radford. 


[1903 


(2)  While  Plailtiis  aad  Terence  commonly  know  only  the 
accent  sid  tia,  dn  iia,  niqiie  ita  and  the  like  (see  the  examples 
cited  p.  81),  a  special  case  is  presented  by  at  ita  vie  in  the 

imprecatory  formulae,      Laegeii  {Rhnn,  Mns,  XII  (1857), 

p  4gS„ff-)  ias  sinira:  that  the  pesitioB  of  the  personal  pro- 
IHHIB  «#  is  iiei  for  each  individual  formula  of  this  kind,  and 
that  ill  those  formulae  which  contain  the  particle  ita  the  pro- 
BOiin  always  follows  immediately  upon  the  particle,  i.e.  ita  me 
diammi^  iim  m^^smwM  luppiier^  etc.  The  stereotyped  char- 
«tef  which,  helongs  tO;the  asseverative  formulae  in  general  is 
also  aptly  described  by  Kellerhoff,  Stndem.  Stnd.  II,  p.  yy  \ 
•*(Earum)  verba  adeo  inter  se  cohaerent,  ut  fere  individua 
CISC'  ncc  ftiaedam  a  fuibusdanti  separari  posse  videantur."' 
Hence,  through  the  enclists  of  the  personal  pronoun,  ita  me 
becomes  practically  a  trisyllabic  word  in  the  frequent  for- 
mnh,  iia-me  di-ameni ;  cf.  especially  Wackernagel,  hidogenn. 
Forsck,  I,  p.  4ia  Hence  we  find  iM  me  actually  written  as 
■one  wo'rd^  ill  the  *clecurtatus,'  Merc.  762,  and  we  find  the 
whole  formula  written  together  (cf,  mehercule,  mediusfidius) 
m  the  *vetus/  Poen.  141 3  itamediament,  i.e.  Itamcdiavient 
(for  this  accentuatloii  of  the  phrase,  which  is  the  normal  one, 
lee  Haufef's  note  on  P'korm*  165).  Much  less  frequent  than 
i/if  me  m  the  imprecatory  formulae  is  the  fuller  form  with 
prefixed  at,  i.e-  M  ita  me,  which  constitutes  a  quadrisyllabic 
group.  In  this  group  the  accent  mt  ita  me  is  found  twice  in 
Terence,  once  in:  Hauttis :  PMrm.  807  vin  sc^lre  ?  at  Ita  me 
s^rvet  luppiter;  the.  JjS;  Mil.  501.  Here  belong  also  the 
following  examples  of  ^mr,  iim  me:  Eun.  1037  Bene,  ita  me 

plcxes  {compositae  dicti&ms)  are  also  occasiinallj  separated  in  actual  use  ;  hence 
we  sometimes  find  the  orilef  -mim  «#,  m  Cic-  €mi.  mai.  §  24,  nemo  enim  est  tarn 
senex.  This  latter  becotne*  the  regtilar  order  in  sticli  combinations  as  quid-enim 
est  (Cat.  mat.  §  5),  neque-emm  eti  {Tmsi,.  4,  22,  §  50),  is-'tmim  e$i  {Fin.  3,  27, 
§  75)  ;  see  still  other  examples  ill  Driger,  tj^  II,  165,  and  in  Hand,  Tursell.  II, 
p.  400  ff.;  at  the  same  time  flit  fiislinction  made  by  Hand,  viz.,  that  quid  ig 
emphatic  in  the  order  quid  enim  esi^  and  «/ emphatic  in  the  ordtr  quid  est  enim, 
may  be  true.  Very  instructive  z\m  to  tic  student  of  Latin  accentual  groups 
are  the  additional  examples  of  Cktpi'l  istge  qaoteii  by  Neuc-Wagmcr,  /i.,  p. 
979  f.,  i.r.  ^m  tmi  mim,  smifs  emi  mim,  eims  rmmimf  H  format  enim,  hoc 
quoqiie  enim,  mikih  wtimm  mim,  mm  imi»i  mim,  non  modo  enim,  quo  mo.w 
emm,  qmi  /#JSril  ....«iifM»  fmm  mmM  mim^  si  §mndo  enim,  etc. 


^3 


di  ament,  factum ;  Hec.  642  ;  PJwrm.  883.  [In  Plautus,  ac- 
cording to  the  examples  cited  by  Lodge,  Lex.  Plant.,  p.  113, 
the  initial  accent  at  ita  me  is  found  five  times,^  ncquc  ita  me  is 
found  once.] 

(3)  The  same  enclisis  of  the  personal  pronoun  appears  in 
the  familiar  locutions  ego  me,  ego  te,  ego  vos,  etc.,  where, 
in  the  Latin  word-order,  the  two  pronouns  assume  a  fixed 
position  in  relation  to  each  other ;  cf.  Rein,  De  pronom.  ap. 
Ter.  col!o:atiouc,  Leipzig,  1879,  p.  3  f. ;  Mahler,  Dc  pronom. 
ap.  Plant,  collatione,  Gryphisw.,  1876,  p.  3  ff.  Metrical  schol- 
ars have  already  observed  in  their  study  of  the  caesura  that 
the  pyrrhics  ;;/////,  tibi^  ego  form  practically  a  single  word 
with  a  following  pronoun  (see  Waltz,  La  langnc  et  la  m^triqne 
d' Horace,  p.  187  f.),  and  this  observation  is  fully  confirmed 
by  the  evidence  of  the  glosses  and  the  Mss.,  which  sometimes 
write  the  two  together,  i,e,  Corp.  Gloss.  Lot.  Ill,  524,  13 
Wtegote'  (where,  however,  the  Greek  Kayw  ae  stands  first); 
Mil.  23  ' egome'  B;  Poen.  1407  ' cgotc'  BC.  Hence  Plautus 
uses  almost  equally  the  accentuations  ^t  ego  tc  and  ct  ^go  te. 
Terence  has  certainly  //  {qnid,  per,  ibi)  ego  te  with  initial 
accent  in  the  following  passages:  Andr.  533;  536;  834; 
Eun.  338 ;  HiC.  610,  while  the  accent  on  the  second  syllable 
perhaps  occurs  in  the  disputed  passage  Andr.  289  hdnc  per 
igo  tc  (so  Spengel,  but  most  editors  read  qnod  per  ego  /•/). 

C.  Genuine  Exceptions.    Statistics.  —  The  Terence  Mss. 

offer  three  examples  of  exceptional  accentuation  in  tribrach 

groups  which  appear  to  be  textually  sound,  i.e.  Hec.  200  qufc- 

quam  ab  ^77/arum  ingenio  ullam  ;  Emu  661  aliquid  domo  dbe- 

4  2 

untem  abstulisse;  ib.  107  Samia  mihi  mater  fijit,  ea  Mbitahsit 

Rhodi.  Of  these  eicamples  the  third  alone  is  sufficiently 
excused  2  by  the  difficulty  of  forming  the  verse-close  (cf. 
p.  67  f.,  above). 

^This  includes  Poen.  1 258,  where  it  is  necessary  to  correct  the  Ms.  reading 
d/  me  ita  to  dt  ita  mi. 

2  It  is  perhaps  possible  that  the  two  remaining  exceptions,  although  they  are 
lot  excused,  are  mitigated  somewhat  by  the  continuous  elision,  i.e.  dom^o') 
&beunt{eni)  abstulisse.  For  certain  licenses  in  the  treatment  of  a  word  are  per- 
haps occasionally  introduced'through  the  elision  of  the  ultima;  thus  Skutsch, 
Forsck.,  p.  107  ff.,  accepts  dmdb^ani). 


W       1  *  ^ 


iMim  M0imj^ihMes. 


91 


It  seems  desirable  to  exhibit  in  brief  statistical  form  the 
results  which  we  have  reached  in  an  extended  examination  of 
tic  tribrach  groups  in  Terence.     In  the  following  table  all 

ejcsttples  In  wiich/iie  qwnititj^  ©f  lie  ioal  ayUable  is  certain 
fur  single  cases  are  represented  by  ea;  examples  which  in- 
volve <•«?/,  amai,  amet,  kahet  are  represented  by  erat ;  those 
which  involve  ibh  ubi^homo  {opus\  by  ibi ;  those  which  in- 
volve; mm.  are  not  inciiiiied  in  tie.  table. 


ISJTIAt 
ACCENT. 

Ambiguous. 

Mebial. 

£a.    .    .    * 
.Erat   .    •    • 
Ibi.    .    .    . 

EgO'    •    •    . 
Ais     .    .    . 

73 
12 

12 

50 

29 

3 

3 

(2) 

3 

Total  .    ♦ 

176 

6(8) 

3 

Those  who  have  followed  my  analysis  of  the  several  kinds 
of  examples  will,  I  believe,  agree  with  me  in  the  view  that 

cases  admitting  the  accent  sed  iM^  sed  epMs  cannot  really  have 
been  ainbifnows  to  tie  Romans  of  the  republic ;  at  the  most 
it  will  be  admitted  that  the  Romans  of  this  period  may  have 
hesitated  in  reading  the  three  cases  of  ego.  Hence,  classing 
tiese  cases  only  as  genuinely  ambiguous  and  estimating  them 
at  half  value,  I  reach  tie  ccmclnsion  that  the  ratio  of  the 
initial  accent  to  tie  medial  in  the  tribrach  groups  of  Terence 
may  be  placed  at  176  :  4 J,  or  at  about  40  :  i. 

Those  who  are  acquainted  with  the  principles  on  which  the 
verse  of  the  early  dramatists  is  constructed  will  know  how  to 
interpret  the  frequent  cases  in  which  the  initial  accentuations 
occur  several  times  in  the  same  verse : 

Ad.  780  :  Nostln  ?  ||  Jam  sclbo.  ||  Quid  agis  ?  quo  abis  ?  \  Mitte  m^. 
Fhorm.  216  :  Nonp6ssum  ad6ise.  |  Ah  quid aglsf  quSahis,  Antiph6? 
Heaut  317  :    QiM-Mk  f4cias  ?  |  Afemim.  |1  Quid  enim  ?  ||  Si  sinds, 

dicdm.ll  Sin6. 
Ad,  680  :  Et  scio :  nam  fe  amo :  quo  magis  qude  agis  curae  sunt  raihi. 


92 


Robert  S.  Radford. 


[1903 


Phorm.    199:    Quid  agam  ?  \  Quid  dis  f  \  Huius  pair  em    vidlsse 
m6,  patru6m  tu6m. 

See  also  Heaut,  191 ;  Phonn.  1041,  etc. 

D.  Observance  of  the  Dipodic  Law.  —  Since  trisyllabic 
groups,   like  sed  agunt  or   idagunt,  are  freely  allowed   by 
tie  republican  dramatic  poets  to  form  the  iambic  anapaest, 
and  since  the  thesis  of  this  shortened  anapaest,  according 
to  the  well-known  metrical  law,  cannot  be  divided  between 
two  words,  it  follows,  as  I  have  already  pointed  out  (p.  'j^), 
that  sed  agunt  was  regarded  by  the  republican  poets  as  very 
nearly  the  equivalent  of  a  single   anapaestic  word.i    Still 
another  proof  of  this  fact  remains  to  be  pointed  out.     Sed 
agunt  is  not  admitted  as  a  shortened  anapaest  in  all  the  feet, 
but  is  excluded  from  the  same  places  from  which  redigunt 
is  excluded,  f.#.  from  the  critical  feet  of  iambic  and  trochaic 
verse,  which  commonly  admit  anapaestic  and  spondaic  words 
only  so  far  as  they  retain  their  normal  prose  accent.     Ritschl 
{Proleg.    pp.    ccxxiii,   ccxxxvi),    with    his    wonderfully   clear 
insight  into  all  the  problems  of  early  Latin  verse,  has  not 
failed  to  notice  that  Plautus  commonly  excluded  these  ana- 
paestic groups  from  the  critical  feet  of  the  dipodies.     A  fact 
of  similar  bearing  is  noted  and  correctly  explained  by  Podi- 
aski,  /.4  pp.  9  f.,  55  f.     In  the  seventh  foot  of  the  iambic 
octonarius  and  of  the  trochaic  septenarius,  in  which  the  met- 
rical law  forbids  the  oxytonesis  of  iambic  words,  but  admits 
that  of  anapaestic  words,  an  iambic  word  when  preceded  by 
a  short  monosyllable  is  regarded  as  the   equivalent  of    an 
anapaestic  word; 2  hence,  we  have  a  legitimate  verse-close 
in  Phorm.  165 : 

Ita  m^  di  b^ne  ament,  lit  mihi  llceat  tdm  diu  quod  amo  frul. 
Cf.  also  Kohler,  De  verb.  ace.  in  troch.  sept.  Plant.,  p.  30. 

|..  ^  f  °;^'"^y'  ^"  *^^  strict  Ovidian  treatment  of  the  dactylic  pentameter  a  close 
like  'reiciet  quid  amans:  i-e.  quasi-trisyllabic  close,  is  not  admissible;  cf.  L. 
Muller,  Res.  Metr.,  p.  248. 

2  The  same  is  true,  of  course,  of  the  fifth  foot  of  the  senarius.  The  explana- 
tion given  by  Luchs  {Stiidem.  Stud.  I,  p.  13)  of  this  part  of  his  metrical  law  is 
scarcely  the  true  one,  as  I  hope  to  show  more  fully  elsewhere. 


¥iiL  xxxiv.] 


Latin  Monosyllables. 


93 


Robert  S.  Radford. 


[1903 


ft*. 


t» 


I  have  examined  three  plays,  i.e.  PhormiOy  Hecyra^  Adel- 
pkoe,  ill:  ©filtr  to  dctcrmili©  how  far  tic  anapaestic  groups 
obserft  tie  dlpodic  law  in  Terence.  la  the  passage  from 
tllC  ifSl  It  Ike  second  foot  of  the  septenarius  they  are,  oi 
course,  freely  admitted  (cf.  Podiaski,  /./.,  p.  73  f.),  especially 
when  they  tfc  preceded  by  a  second  coalescing  monosyllable, 
it$^'.  JPi^rm,  I..<||0''  Mm  <pid  als;  aoQ;  SJ^^'*    "^be  following, 

sisoi  are  familiar  cases  of  enclisis  :  Hec.  6  ob  earn  rem;   584 

4 

lit  apud  me ;  705  in  ea  re;  Ad.  590  qu6d  quidem  erft,  i.e. 

qil6d(iuidem  erft.     The  three  plays  show  the  following  excep- 

li©ns  tH  tic  #podic  law:  Phorm.  777  tii,  Geta,  abf  prae;  951 

qu6d  modo  erat;  Ad.  617  emfsse:  id  anus  mihi;  618  missa,'*'* 

ibi  ein;  704.  likm.  tibi  cAs;  cf.-  Hee.  172  Horunc.     Ea  ad 

h6s  (doubtful  reading).     These  five  exceptions  to  the  dipodic 

law,  in  the  case  of  anapaestic  groups,  are  scarcely  more 
numerous  than  the  exceptions  admitted  by  Terence  in  the 
case  of  anapaestic  words  (see  the  dissertations  of  Brugman 
and  Podiaski);  it  is  noteworthy,  also,  that  four  of  these  cases 

arc  again  preceded  1^  monosyllables,  and  hence  are  excus- 
able as  quasi-choriambic  words  (cf.  Ritschl,  Prolcg.  ccxiii). 
On  tie  other  hand,  anapaestic  groups  occur  55  times  in  the 
critical  feet,  witli  the  normal  accent  sid  agunt,  and  are 
admitted  40  times  in  tie  licensed  feet,  with  the  abnormal 
accent  sed  agdnt. 

E.  QuADRisvLLABic  GROUPS.  —  In  trisyllabic  groups  we 
have  seen  tiat  tie  tirec-syllable  law  was  able,  practically,  to 
obliterate  tie  panse  after'  a  short  monosyllable,  and  to^^^,  ijt 
definitely  the  accent  s^d  ego.  The  case  is  quite  different  with 
quadrisyllable  groups,  such  as  sed  homines,  for  the  reason 
that,  in  the  case  of  fourth  paeon  words,  there  exists  only  a 
strong  tendency  toirafi  the  recessive  accent,  but  no  absolute 
four-syllable  law.  In  the  case  of  quadrisyllable  groups,  the 
slight  pause  after  the  monosyllable  tended  to  check  this 
recessive  tendency.  Nevertheless,  Biicheler,  Umbrica,  p. 
171,  was  probably  correct  in  assuming  that  the  Umbrian 
neidhabas,  Ig.  IV,  33  {i.e.  net  adhabas\  points  to  the  existence 


« 


|j|l*miljn 


of  the  accent  «/  adcas  in  early  Latin.     The  examination  of 
the  accent  of  these  groups  in  three  plays  of  Terence  {And/:, 
Enn.,  Hcaitt.)  yields  the  following  results.      The   predomi- 
nance  of  the  one  accent  or  the  other  depends  largely  upon 
the  kind  of  verse  employed.     In  trochaic  verse  the  accent  on 
tie  fourth  syllable  is  nearly  twice  as  frequent  as  the  accent 
on  the  third  syllable,   the  ratio  for  the  three  plays  being 
23:  13;  in  iambic  verse  the  accent  on  the  third  syllable  is 
nearly  three  times  as  frequent  as  the  initial  accent,  the  ratio 
being  77  :  27.     Hence,  since  iambic  verse  greatly  predomi- 
nates in  Terence,  the  accent  on  the  third  syllable  is  nearly 
twice  as  frequent  as  the  initial  accent  in  the  three  plays, 
taken  as  a  whole,  the  combined  ratio  being  90  :  50.     Hence, 
if  we  should   look  only  at   the   combined    ratio,  we   might, 
perhaps,  conclude  that  scd homines  alone  represents  the  gram- 
matical accent.     It  is  more  probable,  however,  that  s^d  homi- 
nes has  been  a  genuine,  though  a  less  usual,  pronunciation, 
and  that  the  grammatical  accent  has  vacillated,  in  the  repub- 
lican age,   between  the   first   two   syllables.     This   may  be 
shown   from  the  following  considerations:    (i)    The   initial 
accent,  as  has  already  been  mentioned,  is  actually  twice  as 
frequent  in  trochaic  verse,  which  proves  that  it  was  by  no 
means   avoided.     (2)  Many  single  phrases  show  the  initial 
accent  predominant,  also,  in  the  combined  ratio.    Thus,  quid 
agitur  occurs  in  Plautus  and  Terence   10  times  (5  cases  in 
iambic  verse,  4  in  trochaic,  i  in  cretic:  Pcrs.  17;  309;  Pseud. 
273  ;  Stich.  528  ;  722  ;  True.  860 ;  Phorm.  610 ;  Ad,  373  ;  883  ; 
885);  quid  agitur  occwr^  6  times  (5  cases  in  iambic  verse,  i  in 
trochaic  :  Most.  1076 ;  Pers.  406  ;  Pseud.  457 ;  Eun.  271  ;  456  ; 
Ad.  901).     Similarly  the  type  sM  igitur  occurs  in  Terence  7 
times  (3  cases  in  iambic  verse,  4  in  trochaic  :  Andr.  375  ;  383  ; 
519;  598;  749;  ^'^«-  854;  966);  the  type  jr^/ 4r^V//r  occurs  5 
times  (all  the  cases  being  in  iambic  verse:  Audi-.  103;  Elun. 
46;  Meant.  818;  Phorm.  924;  Ad.  746).      It  is  noteworthy 
that  the  recession  is   especially  frequent   in   quadrisyllabic 
groups,  such  as  sM  opus  est,  s/d  ego  me,  etc.,  owing  to  the 
analogy  of  the  simple  s^d  opus,  sM  ego,  etc. ;  cf .  p.  82  f.,  above. 
(3)  In  proceleusmatic  feet  (iambic),  which  follow  very  closely 


Vol.  xxxiv.] 


Latin  Monosyllables. 


95 


the  grammatical  accent,  the  accent  on  the  third  syllable  is 

SGiB^viiat  mmt  tisiial«  as  Hec.  aS9(|uam  ego:  id  ddeo ;  but 
the  iiitial.  accent  is  also  fo«©il,  as  PMrm.  563  quid  est  quod 
opera  ;  Pcrs.  480  homines  ^go  h&die ;  Cure.  93  viden  ut  aferi- 
untur  (where  mi  is  unnecessarily  bracketed  by  Gotz);  Asiu. 
699;  Trim.  S46;  Tmc.  763 ;  see  Ahlberg,  ProceL  I,  p.  131  ff. 
It:#iiiy  'Fenainstoiiiiicale  Ibose  parts  of  the  verse  in  which 
the  initial  accent  chiefly  occurs.  In  trochaic  verse  this  accent 
is  found  occasionally  in  all  the  feet,  but  chiefly  in  the  first  and 
fifth,  ix,  in  the  first  foot  of  each  colon  ;  as,  — 

Amir.  335  :  £^0 idagdm  mihi  qui  ne ddtur.  |  Sat habed\)2i\ om 6ptum^. 

I.  i 

In  iambic  verse  the  initial  accent  occurs  chiefly  in  the  third 
foot  and  immediately  after  the  caesura  of  the  scnarius  or 
octonafiy»(i^..il'»^4i3;  536;  883;  cf.  tlie  frequent  accent 
fdciliiis  in  the  same  position),  in  the  fourth  foot  of  the  sena- 
rius  (e.g.  Andr.  89;  417;  749;  762)  to  aid  in  forming  the 
well-known  senarius-closc,  C \  w \j£.\\j Z.  t  cf .  Luchs,  Stitdem, 
Simd.  I,  p.  13;  Klotz,  Gmrnds.,  p,  243,  and  at  the  very  close 
nl  the  senaritis  or  octonarius,  cf.  Klotz,  /./.,  p.  280  (t.g. 
Amir.  311 ;  £im.  84;  854).  The  following  examples  illustrate 
these  positions : — 

Andr,  413  :  Hodie  6bserv5re,  ut  ft/id  a^eret  de  m'lptiis* 

M,  749 :  Satin  silniis,  qui  me  id  r6gites?  !l  Quera  4"^^  ({I'tiir  rog^m? 

/#•  311 :  Yidco.     6mnia  dxpertri  c^rtumst  prliis  qiiam  p^reo.  ||  Quid 

7 
h'e  iigltf 

In  tie  light  of  these  results  I  wish  to  comment  briefly  on 
the  theory  of  'initial  intensity,'  which  was  first  put  forward  as 
applicable  t©  Latin  words  %  L.  Ha  vet,  De  Satnrnio,  Paris, 

1880,  p.  2^S*^,Mim0ms^Sfh  SmiMi de  Linguist^e^  VI 
(1889),  p.  13  l-X  ^^^  ^^*  since  found  other  adherents.*  Ac- 
cording to  Havet  an  intensive  pronunciation,  ii#.  a  stress- 
accent,  was  associated  with  tie  initial  syllable  of  Latin  words. 

This  *  initial  inteisily  *  i%,  lmm.mti,  quite  different  froip,,  the 

^  Cf.  especially  J.  V«4ry«,  Metkerckes  smr  Fhistoire  et  les  effets  de  PintemM 
initiaie  en  Latin^  Faris,  1902,  and  wt  tbe  criticism  of  the  theor)-  by  Solmsen  in 
liis  review  of  this  work,  Wol  flin'i  Arekspf  XIII,  p.  137  f. 


96 


Robert  5.  Radford. 


[1903 


Latin  accent  described  by  the  grammarians ;  for  the  latter,  in 
Havet's  judgment,  was  a  musical  accent  and  exerted  no  influ- 
ence upon  Latin  prosody.     Further,  Havet  recognizes  this 
*  initial  intensity '  as  belonging  not  only  to  words  but  also  to 
groups,  and  he  explains  the  shortening  in  tibi  istum  as  due  to 
tie  initial  intensity  of  the  group  :  *'(Les  monosyllabes  brefs) 
peuvent  abr^ger  la  premiere  syllable  du  mot  suivant,  parce 
qu'ils  font  jusqua  un  certain  point  corps  avec  lui"  (Havet 
quoted  by  Plessis,  ed.  Ad.,  p.  5).     It  is  clear  that  so  far  as 
concerns  the  fact  of  intensive  pronunciation  in  the  first  sylla- 
ble of  tibi  istum,  this  explanation  is  identical  with  the  one 
which  I  have  offered,  but  when  the  question  is  asked  whether 
the  intensive  pronunciation  of  the  first  syllable  is  due  to  the 
laws  of  the  Latin  accent,  Havet  holds  that  it  bears  no  rela- 
tion to  these  laws,  but  that  the  initial  syllable  is  stressed  qua 
initialis.     Since  then  he  admits  the  principle  of  word-groups 
in  Latin  pronunciation,  the  conclusion  would  seem  to  follow, 
if  the  theory  of  initial  intensity  be  correct,  that  trisyllabic 
and  quadrisyllable  groups^  should  be  stressed  on  the  first  syl- 
lable with  equal  or  nearly  equal  frequency.     In  practice  we 
find,  however,  that  these  groups  do  not  follow  such  a  law  of 
initial  intensity,  but  that  they  obey  rather  the  law  accord- 
ing t0  which  the  Latin  accent  must  recede  three  syllables  and 
may  (in  words  like  facilius)  recede  four.     Hence  it  appears 
that  the  accentuation  of  these  groups  cannot  be  explained  by 
the  theory  of  initial  intensity,  but  only  on  the  basis  of  the 
Latin  accent-law. 


VI.    Ancient  Testimonies. 

A.  Evidence  of  the  Grammarians  and  Glosses.  —  It  is 
not  my  purpose  to  review  at  length  in  this  paper  the  testimonies 
of  the  Latin  grammarians  upon  the  accentuation  of  three- 
syllable  groups  nor  to  examine  fully  the  evidence  of  the  word- 
division  in  the  inscriptions  and  Mss. ;  a  brief  treatment  of  these 
topics  will  be  sufficient  here.     The  Latin  grammarians  have 

*  The  verse-form  would  not  itself  prevent  this  accentuation,  as  is  shown  by  the 
r.gular  accent  fdcilim. 


¥(il.  xjoiv.] 


Latin  Monosyllables, 


97 


nowhere  had  occasion  to  treat  in  a  general  or  theoretical  way 
tic  accent  of  such  word-groups  as  we  have  examined ;  their 

M$t8,  iwirCicr,^,.  nf  ticiniMfe  freqticat  compound  conjunctions 
«ot  oniy  furnish  us  witli  i»iicli  iraluable  information  on  the 
general  subject  ©i  accentual  groups  {contposita)^  but  include 
several  examples  irf  tlie  present  kind.     Thus  Priscian   ex- 

f ressly  iaforaW'  iit tial  tie  a>wpiiiini  conjunctions  et  enim  ^ 

(etenim)  and  sed enim  {stdmim)hme  the  initial  accent :  Keil, 
III,  91,  II  1  (aaScholl,  Be  me.,  p.  192)  Composita  vero  dtgue 
/ieuim,  sidenim.  Haec  enim  ex  accentu  composita  esse  nos- 
€iiittir.  Sitnilariy  smiemm  is  iwined  as  a  compositum  also  in 
a  gloss  on  Max.  Vict,,  Kdl,  VI,  203,  \2\si  enim,  i.e.  probably 
sicnim,  is  named  as  a  emnpositum  by  Donatus,  Keil,  IV,  365, 
2;  ibid,,  p.  3%  5,  and  if  Cledonius,  Keil,  V,  24,  25  ;  com- 
pute, aiSD^,,  lie  tfealinciit  dE  qmdistic  (in  early  Latin  often 
quiMsiic)  as  a  eompositnm  by  Priscian,  Keil,  III,  8$,  33  J  Corp. 
Gloss,  LmL  V,6«,  55  '  qiddistic  sub  uno  accentu  est  profecto 
iicl  omnino/  There  can  be  little  doubt  that  the  numerous 
iltlef  ■cnwpound.s  of  emm^  iave  a  similar  accent,  ix.  at  enim, 
neqme  mim,  quid  enim,  quod  enim,  M^  emim,  etc. 

Among  tie  glossarists  Festus  treats  ncccnnt{—non  ennt) 
and  necerim  {ssmee  et$m)  as  single  words  (p.  162,  11  Miill. ; 
Paul  iw.  Fest,.,  p.  162,  21  MulLX  int  tie  most  complete  evi- 
dence may  be  drawn  from  Gstz  and  Gnnderniann's  Corpus 
Ghssarioram  Lat,  The  conjunctions  here  glossed  as  com- 
pound words  are  sede[c]eum,  II,  181,  19  (where  the  gloss  einhe 
apparently  indicates  tiat  tic  force  of  the  simple  conjunction 
is.  lost  as  completely  .as  in,  tie  Italian  ebbene  {^eiime% 
i  very  good ');  sedenim^  IV,  565,  52  ;  ntcnim,  IV,  470»  45  *  Q^^i^- 
enim,  IV,  461,  i ;  quidita,  II,  lij,  14;  IV,  158,  33»  etc.;  cf. 
qmidistie:,  V,  §22^^  $$;  quid  igitmr,  IV,  421,  16.  In  addition 
we  ind  glossf  s  ii'pon  tie  pronouns  and  verbs  atego  and  astego, 

1  £i  enim  is  nearly  always  written  in  oiif  texts  of  Latin  authors  as  one  word;  it 
is  scarcely  necessary  to  say  that  no  such  uniformity  exists  in  the  Mss.,  which  no 
more  write  et  enim  than  they  write  ob  viam  and  in  vicem  invariably  as  one  word. 
On  account,  however,  of  being  much  the  most  frequent  of  all  the  compounds  of 
enim,  etenim  is  usually  written  as  one  word,  and  this  orthography  is  much  more 
frequent  than  sedenintt  quidenim,  etc.,  which  also  occQr. 


98 


Robert  S.  Radford, 


[1903 


II,  284,  34  (where,  however,  the  Greek  stands  first);  et  ego, 

III,  342,  22  (where  also  the  Greek  stands  first);  ide{^g^^o 
{  =  iyo)  auT6[v']\  II,  80,  40 ;  ninnqnid  ego  {i.e.  num  quidego 
as  a  rule),  =  egone,  IV,  369,  35;  idagis,  idagit,  the  latter  = 
ii^epyel,  II,  y6,  12,  13  ;  qiiianiat,  II,  167,  5.  The  grammarians 
also  name  qnidita  among  the  compound  adverbs  {quidita, 
Audax,  Keil,  VII,  348,  14  ;  quid  ita,  Dositheus,  VII,  410,  24), 
and  an  abbreviation  for  the  frequent  phrase  ego  ejtiin  is  found 
in  the  Commentarii  Not.  Tironian.  It  is  instructive  to  com- 
pare also  the  traditional  orthography  in  our  texts  of  etenim, 
poterOy  potcram,  satago,  retr{p)ago,  rctr{o)eo,  velitti  (cf.  velut, 
mmnt\  adeo,  ideo,  postidea^  ant{c)idea,  ub{i)ubi,  nccuter, 
niuter  (according  to  some,  cf.  Lindsay,  Lat.  Lang.,  p.  39), 
necopinantem,  etiani,  quoniani,  etc.,  although  it  should  be 
remembered  that  the  separate  writing  et  enim,  sat  ago,  vel  uti, 
nbi  iibi,  nee  opifiantem  is  also  frequent  in  the  Mss.,  and  even 
the  division  ad  eo,  id  eo  is  sometimes  found. 

B.  Word-division  in  Inscriptions  and  Mss.  —  Finally, 
the  word-division  in  the  inscriptions  and  Mss.  has  an  important 
bearing  upon  the  question  of  the  accent ;  for,  from  the  time  of 
Quintilian  (I,  5,  25)  the  Roman  grammarians  often  expressly 
connect  the  question  of  punctuation  and  word-division  with 
the  determination  of  the  accent,  often  in  the  formula  *  ratio 
distinguendi  (dividendi)  regulas  accentuum  corrumpit ' ;  see 
the  numerous  passages  of  the  grammarians  on  this  subject, 
which  are  collected  by  Scholl,  /./.,  p.  127  f.  They  also  fre- 
quently recommend  an  unusual  word-division,  i.e,  haiiscio 
instead  of  //«//(<:/)  .fr/^(Pseudo-Phocas,  Keil,  V,  441,  i),  on  the 
ground  that  it  corresponds  more  fully  to  the  accentuation. 
In  the  case  of  the  Latin  prepositions,  both  monosyllabic  and 
dissyllabic,  the  omission  of  punctuation  in  writing  is  well 
known,  but  the  similar  usage  by  which  the  monosyllabic  con- 
junctions, adverbs,  and  pronouns  are  joined  in  writing  with 
the  following  word  has  received  less  attention,  although  it  is 
by  no  means  rare.  Marius  Victorinus,  Keil,  VI,  23,  7  ff.,  pre- 
scribes the  omission  of  punctuation  in  nechoc  and  neeillud  ]\xsX 
as  in  ingalliam  and  initaliam :  sed  ne  ea  quidem,  quae  cum 
praepositione  dicuntur,  circumpungetis,  ut  circumduci  et  cir- 


Vill.  xxxiv.] 


Latin  Monosyllables. 


99 


cwnveniri,  et  nonnulli  et  paulopost,  nee  haec,  ut  ingalliam, 
initaliam,  ncclioc,  nccilliidi  quae  iofinite  dicuntur.  In  accord- 
ance witli  this  orthograpliy  the  mooosyllables  are  at  times 
written  together  with  the  following  word  in  inscriptions  of 
the  best  period,  as  may  be  seen  from  the  examples  collected 
by  Corssen,  who  cites  Ausspr.  1 1 2,  p.  ^^  etcoronis,  itauti, 
,|llii^ll«:<llf'■  #  (irfteii:  la„tfcc  fefmmla  *astu  ea  fta  faxsis/  Acta 
frair.  mv.;  cf.  miiM  glossed  as  tuvero,  Corp.  Gloss.  Lat.,  IV, 
a2,  33)1  p.  877  quodie  (very  frequent,  cf.  also  CIL.  II,  snppL, 
indoff  p.  I181X  qmvixit,  p.  879  huncincrem,  p.  881  nonliccbit, 
nondeimf^.  This  list  ttight  be^  greatly  increased  from 
inscriptions  of  the  best  character,  and  if  exam|)les  are  not  to 
be  found  collected,  like  those  involving  the  prepositions,  in 
tie  various  Indices  of  the  CIL,^  it  is  because  the  editors  have 
■oiten,  ascribed  tie  absence  of  the^  division-points  to  careless- 
less  Of  to  exposure  rather  than  to  tbc  true  cause,  viz.  the 
Roman  method  of  word-division.  In  the  minuscule  Mss.  of 
the  Carolingian  period  also,  upon  which  the  word-division  of 
Hif  texts  chiefly  rests,  we  find  the  monosyllabic  particles  and 
pronouns  not  seldoia  joined  with  the  following  word ;  cf. 
Wattenbach,  Lat.  Palaeo^.,^  p.  761  Lindsay,  Lat.  Text, 
Emcndatityn^  p,  14.  In  carefully  written  Mss.  of  this  period 
the  traditional  fttles  of  word-division  approved  by  the  gram- 
marians arC"  commottif  observed,,  by  the  copyists,  so  that  their 
usage  is  in  substantial  agreement  with  the  inscriptions  of  the 
fourth  and  fifth  centuries,  it  is  scarcely  necessary  to  add 
that  the,  iior«Wiv!slcwi„.of  He  iliiniisciile  Mss,  is  seldom  strictly 
.  uniform  if  dipiblfwl  cases,  and  tlie  uniformity  wbicb  of,ten 
appears  in  printed  texts  is  due  to  the  modem  editor.  Except 
in  the  case  of  obvious  blunders,  however,  the  word-division  of 
the  Mss.  is  clearly  the  authoritative  division  for  critical  pur- 
poses, and  determines  in  each  Cfise  wbtl  constitutes  •  one  part 
of  speech  '  {una  pars  orationis). 

In  the  case  of  the  Terence  Mss.,  as  it  happens,  Umpfen- 
bach  has  not  included  in  bis  critical  apparatus  ^  variations  in 
the  word-division,  but  their  usage  is  probably  not  very  differ- 

*  On  the  general  character  ©f  Umpfenbach's  collation  of  the  Terence  Mss.,  se« 
Minton  Warren,  Am,/§mrn.  PkiL  III,  59. 


100 


Robert  S.  Radford. 


[1903 


ent  from  that  of  the  Palatine  Mss.  of  Plautus,  which  afford 
examples  on  every  page  like  mctarbitro  (B),  Cas.  143,  sisitn 
293,  ncniiJii  341,  etc.  It  is  noticeable  that  Umpfenbach  writes 
always  refert^  non  dum,  vel  uti^  quis  nam  (on  the  basis  of  the 
frequent  nam  qnis^  quis  .  .  .  nam,  cf.  Hand,  Turs.  IV,  18  ff.), 
inter  est  {Ad.  393),  inter  sift  {Bun.  685),  super  est  {PJiorm. 
162),  etc.  These  last  examples  are  in  accordance  with  the 
usage  of  many  of  the  best  official  inscriptions  (cf.  Corssen, 
Atisspr.  IP,  p.  853),  and  supcresse  at  least  is  generally  recog- 
nized as  a  separable  compound  (cf.  L.  M tiller.  Res  Metr., 
p.  264).  Nowhere,  in  fact,  is  it  more  difficult  to  distinguish 
between  the  genuine  and  the  separable  Latin  compounds^ 
than  in  the  case  of  many  of  the  compound  verbs ;  it  is  clear, 
however,  from  the  evidence  of  Latin  verse  and  the  statements 
of  the  grammarians  that  these  words  were  regularly  accented 
as  composita,  «.#.  inter  siet  (cf.  ijiter  ibi,  intc^r  eos^  proptdr  eos\ 
sup^r  erat,  circum  dedit,  ante  venit,  etc. 

One  other  question  of  Terentian  orthography  is  valuable 
for  the  light  which  it  throws  upon  the  accentuation,  viz.  the 
assimilation  which  occurs  at  times  in  the  praepositiones  ad- 
positae  and  which  implies  a  closeness  of  connection  equal  to 
that  existing  in  the  case  of  the  praepositiones  compositae. 
Thus  Umpfenbach  {praef.  xiv)  points  out  that  the  Bembintis 
has  offaetnviy  Heaut.  956,  for  ob  factum,  oppeccatum,  ib.  990, 
for  ob  pcecatum,  while  at  te  occurs  8  times  for  ad  te ;  for 
assimilation  in  other  authors,  see  Neue-Wagener,  Fojinenl. 
II,  pp,  783,  905.  Hence  we  cannot  doubt  that  the  secondary 
grammatical  accent  is  fully  observed  in  the  following : 

Caecil.  com.  frgtn.  266  R. :  Sa^pe  est  ^tiara  stip  palliolo  s6rdid6 
sapi^ntid. 

It  is  evident  from  these  facts,  which  might  easily  be  illus- 
trated by  more  numerous  examples,  that  the  Latin  word- 
division  is  far  from  being  fixed  in  a  multitude  of  cases,  and 

^  It  should  be  remembered  that  many  of  the  combinations  which  later  came 
to  be  felt  as  genuine  compounds  were  still  separable  compounds  or  word-groups 
In  early  Latin ;  cf.  Ter.  Ilec.  364  qua  me  propter  adduxi ;  630  ne  revereatur, 
minus  iam  quo  redeat  domum. 


vol,  XXX1¥,J 


Latin  Monosyllables, 


lOI 


that  those  writers  upon  Latin  accentuation  who  have  treated 

tlic  attbject  alisiost  entirely  in  dependence  upon  the  traditional 
word-division  have  chosen  too  narrow  and  too  uncertain  a 
basis  for  their  study. 

VII.    Evidence  of  the  Romance  Languages. 

The  Romance  languages  have  preserved  in  rich  abundance 
the  word-groups  formed  by  the  coalescence  of  monosyllabic 
words,  £ir.  Span.  ■iam^:km^  ^Jamhm,  Ital.  ebbine  ^  etbem^  ossia 
=  auimi.^  mmmim  =  m€mmms\  etc.  (for  the  treatment  of  these 
phrases  in  Italian,  see  Meyer-Liibke,  Gramm.  d.  roman,  Sprach, 
I,  p.  508),  but  the  accent  of  these  groups  as  a  rule  has  been 
derived  from  the  late  period  of  vulgar  Latin,  when  the  pro- 
mmm  of  decomposition  (recomposition)  were  applied  to  all 
the  compositm  which  were  still  recognized  as  such,  i.e,  cxplkat 
(Fr.  esploie)  instead  of  the  classical  ixplicat,  dcsupcr  (Fr. 
desure)  instead  of  the  classical  disuper^  etc.;  cf.   Meyer- 
Liibke,  /X,  I,  495.      Notwithstanding  the   great    changes 
wrougl^t  in  this  period,  the  original  accent  has  been  retained 
in  some  cases.    Tho%  as  Corssen,  Ausspr,  IP,  p.  889,  and 
Skutsch,  Forsch.,  p.  158,  have  noticed,  the  Italian  forms  colta, 
della,  smiim  give  evidence  of  the  accent  aim  ilia,  d^  tlla,  sub 
ma,  Just  as  we  know  from  the  Latin  grammarians  (see  the 
passages  quoted  by  Scholl,  De  arc,  p.   192  f.)  that  di'Inde, 
pMnde,  etc.,  continued  to  be  the  usual  colloquial  pronunciation 
in  contrast  with,  the  laore  formal  deimde,  perindc,  etc.    So 
also  the  relative  pronoun  qtd,  which  was  generally  atonic  in 
Latin,  but  of  course  became  tonic  in  these  groups,  has  both 
forms  preserved  in  Spanish,  i^.  the  tonic  form  quiem  and  the 
atonic  que  (cf.  Seeliman,,  J'liw;^:^  <£,  ite.,  p.  57);  for  other 
possible  cases,  see  Meyer-Libke,  U,,  p.  504  ff.     W'e  may 
expect  that  additional  cases  of  the  preservation  side  by  side 
of  the  tonic  and  the  atonic  forms  of  the  Latin  conjunctions 
and  adverbs  will  be  recognized  when  the  problem  of  these 
double  forms  has  been  more  fully  worked  out  by  Romance 
scholars  than  is  the  case  at  present. 


102  Robert  S,  Radford,  [1903 


VIII.    Previous  Investigators. 

It  remains  to  indicate  how  far  students  of  early  Latin  verse 
have  already  advanced  in  the  direction  of  the  conclusions 
which  have  been  reached  in  this  article.  The  particular  cases 
of  trisyllabic  groups  in  which  uniform  accentuation  has  already 
been  noted  are  indeed  very  numerous.  Thus  the  invariable 
accentuation  of  qtiid  ita  has  been  pointed  out  by  Luchs, 
Herfnes,  VIII,  114;  of  quid  ego  in  certain  phrases  by  Keller- 
hoff,  Studem.  Stud,  II,  55  (cf.  also  Seyffert,  Stud.  Plaut., 
p.  9);  of  at  enim  by  Seyffert,  Bej'L  Phil.  Woch.  1885,  Sp., 
p.  40,  and  Ribbeck,  Com.  Rom.  Fragmeiita^,  p.  xxxiv ;  of  quid 
ais  by  Conradt,  die  Metr.  Compos,  d.  Kom.  d.  Ter.,  p.  159; 
of  hie  homo  by  Luchs,  Comment.  Pros.  I,  p.  6  f. ;  of  quis 
homo,  is  homo  by  Nilsson,  Quomodo  pronomina  ap.  PI.  et  Ter, 
colloceniur,  Lund,  1901,  p.  61  (footnote).  Several  of  these 
accentuations  are  also  discussed  by  Skutsch,  Forseh.,  p/154, 
and  in  his  edition  of  the  Captivi,  which  came  into  my  hands 
after  my  own  results  had  been  reached,  Lindsay  a^fe  qui 
homo,  tibi  ego  dieo  (pp.  367,  372).  In  the  quad^llabic 
groups  Bucheler,  Umbrica^  p.  171,  has  inferred  the  Plautine 
accentuation  ni  adeas  from  the  Umbrian  form  neidhabas ; 
Hartmann,  K.  Z.  XXVII,  p.  558,  has  derived  igitur  as  a 
weakened  form  from  quid  agitur. 

Finally,  Ritschl,  Proleg.,  pp.  cclviii-cclxi,  has  discussed  this 
problem  with  his  usual  thoroughness  and  breadth  of  view. 
He  does  not  limit  his  inquiry  to  the  proclisis  of  the  preposi- 
tions, but  mentions  also  *  other  similar  combinations  of  words,' 
i,e.  quid  agis,  quid  ais,  lit  opust,  quod  homo,  quod  edis,  etc., 
and  from  the  analogy  of  these  combinations  he  clearly  derives 
the  Plautine  accentuation  of  d^  illo,  dt  iste,  sH  intus,  quod 
omnes,  etc.  (cf.  Proleg.,  p.  cclxi:  *  correptiones  valde  propin- 
quae  eadem  prorsus  ratione  reguntur ').  Hence  in  this,  as 
in  all  other  questions  of  Latin  sentence-accentuation,  Ritschl 
has  sketched  in  brief  but  clear  outlines  the  general  conclu- 
sions which  further  study  can  only  serve  to  strengthen. 
While  the  present  study  of  syllable-shortening  was  at  first 


s 


Vol.  xxxiv.] 


Latin  Monosyllables. 


103 


undertaken  independently,^  it  will  fulfil  its  purpose  if  it  shall 
be  instrumental  in  reviving  Ritschl's  solution  of  the  problem 
and  shall  offer  additional  evidence  in  support  of  his  conclu- 
sions. 

*  Unfortunately,  a  copy  of  the  Prolegomena  was  not  accessible  to  the  writer 
during  the  first  part  of  his  work.  The  above  reference  to  Ritschl  must  not  be 
understood  as  meaning  that  he  recognized  in  the  Proleg.  the  complete  recession 
of  the  early  accent  in  sed  ea^  sed  agis,  dd  eum^  etc. 


